ArticlePeerJ2021
Rethinking the use of finite element simulations in comparative biomechanics research.
Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Finite Element Analysis in Running Footwear Biomechanics: Insights for Running-Related Musculoskeletal Injuries.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of running speed on the probability of meniscal failure in the knee joint: based on finite element analysis and the Weibull failure model.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Relationship between tooth macrowear and jaw morphofunctional traits in representative hypercarnivores.PeerJ · 2024Article
- Mechanical demands of bite in plane head shapes of ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) workers.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Does the model reflect the system? When two-dimensional biomechanics is not 'good enough'.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2023Article
- One step further in biomechanical models in palaeontology: a nonlinear finite element analysis review.PeerJ · 2022Review
- More Challenging Diets Sustain Feeding Performance: Applications Toward the Captive Rearing of Wildlife.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the past 15 years, the finite element (FE) method has become a ubiquitous tool in the repertoire of evolutionary biologists. The method is used to estimate and compare biomechanical performance implicated as selective factors in the evolution of morphological structures. A feature common to many comparative studies using 3D FE simulations is small taxonomic sample sizes. The time-consuming nature of FE model construction is considered a main limiting factor in taxonomic breadth of comparative FE analyses. Using a composite FE model dataset, I show that the combination of small taxonomic sample sizes and comparative FE data in analyses of evolutionary associations of biomechanical performance to feeding ecology generates artificially elevated correlations. Such biases introduce false positives into interpretations of clade-level trends. Considering this potential pitfall, recommendations are provided to consider the ways FE analyses are best used to address both taxon-specific and clade-level evolutionary questions.
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.