ArticleJournal of biomechanical engineering2021
Deciphering the "Art" in Modeling and Simulation of the Knee Joint: Variations in Model Development.
Article in Journal of biomechanical engineering, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid personalized computational modeling of the wrist.Medical engineering & physics · 2026Article
- Personalized musculoskeletal models show that gait biofeedback alters knee cartilage contact mechanics in ACL-reconstructed subjects.Journal of biomechanics · 2026Article
- Deciphering the "Art" in Modeling and Simulation of the Knee Joint: Model Benchmarking.Journal of biomechanical engineering · 2026Article
- Validating subject-specific knee models fromFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Automated 2D and 3D finite element overclosure adjustment and mesh morphing using generalized regression neural networks.Medical engineering & physics · 2024Article
- Reproducibility in modeling and simulation of the knee: Academic, industry, and regulatory perspectives.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2023Review
- Deciphering the "Art" in Modeling and Simulation of the Knee Joint: Assessing Model Calibration Workflows and Outcomes.Journal of biomechanical engineering · 2023Article
- Towards a Transferable Modeling Method of the Knee to Distinguish Between Future Healthy Joints from Osteoarthritic Joints: Data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2023Article
- A Parameter Sensitivity Analysis on Multiple Finite Element Knee Joint Models.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- A Method to Compare Heterogeneous Types of Bone and Cartilage Meshes.Journal of biomechanical engineering · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of computational modeling to investigate knee joint biomechanics has increased exponentially over the last few decades. Developing computational models is a creative process where decisions have to be made, subject to the modelers' knowledge and previous experiences, resulting in the "art" of modeling. The long-term goal of the KneeHub project is to understand the influence of subjective decisions on the final outcomes and the reproducibility of computational knee joint models. In this paper, we report on the model development phase of this project, investigating model development decisions and deviations from initial modeling plans. Five teams developed computational knee joint models from the same dataset, and we compared each teams' initial uncalibrated models and their model development workflows. Variations in the software tools and modeling approaches were found, resulting in differences such as the representation of the anatomical knee joint structures in the model. The teams consistently defined the boundary conditions and used the same anatomical coordinate system convention. However, deviations in the anatomical landmarks used to define the coordinate systems were present, resulting in a large spread in the kinematic outputs of the uncalibrated models. The reported differences and similarities in model development and simulation presented here illustrate the importance of the "art" of modeling and how subjective decision-making can lead to variation in model outputs. All teams deviated from their initial modeling plans, indicating that model development is a flexible process and difficult to plan in advance, even for experienced teams.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.