ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022
A Parameter Sensitivity Analysis on Multiple Finite Element Knee Joint Models.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Individualized multimodal integration of optimized dual fluoroscopic imaging registration and finite element modeling for knee joint stress during stair ascent.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
- Deciphering the "Art" in Modeling and Simulation of the Knee Joint: Model Benchmarking.Journal of biomechanical engineering · 2026Article
- Surgical parameters influence paediatric knee kinematics and cartilage stresses in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Navigating subject-specific variability using neuromusculoskeletal-finite element modelling analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Article
- The Impact of the Yeoh Model's Variability in Contact on Knee Joint Mechanics.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Validating subject-specific knee models fromFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- A review of finite element modeling and surgical simulation of meniscal tear in knee joint: progress and challenges.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Impact of knee geometry on joint contact mechanics after meniscectomy.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Deciphering the "Art" in Modeling and Simulation of the Knee Joint: Assessing Model Calibration Workflows and Outcomes.Journal of biomechanical engineering · 2023Article
- Sex differences in linear bone measurements occur following puberty but do not influence femoral or tibial torsion.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The reproducibility of computational knee joint modeling is questionable, with models varying depending on the modeling team. The influence of model variations on simulation outcomes should be investigated, since knowing the sensitivity of the model outcomes to model parameters could help determine which parameters to calibrate and which parameters could potentially be standardized, improving model reproducibility. Previous sensitivity analyses on finite element knee joint models have typically used one model, with a few parameters and ligaments represented as line segments. In this study, a parameter sensitivity analysis was performed using multiple finite element knee joint models with continuum ligament representations. Four previously developed and calibrated models of the tibiofemoral joint were used. Parameters of the ligament and meniscus material models, the cartilage contact formulation, the simulation control and the rigid cylindrical joints were studied. Varus-valgus simulations were performed, changing one parameter at a time. The sensitivity on model convergence, valgus kinematics, articulating cartilage contact pressure and contact pressure location were investigated. A scoring system was defined to categorize the parameters as having a "large," "medium" or "small" influence on model output. Model outcomes were sensitive to the ligament prestretch factor, Young's modulus and attachment condition parameters. Changes in the meniscus horn stiffness had a "small" influence. Of the cartilage contact parameters, the penalty factor and Augmented Lagrangian setting had a "large" influence on the cartilage contact pressure. In the rigid cylindrical joint, the largest influence on the outcome parameters was found by the moment penalty parameter, which caused convergence issues. The force penalty and gap tolerance had a "small" influence at most. For the majority of parameters, the sensitivity was model-dependent. For example, only two models showed convergence issues when changing the Quasi-Newton update method. Due to the sensitivity of the model parameters being model-specific, the sensitivity of the parameters found in one model cannot be assumed to be the same in other models. The sensitivity of the model outcomes to ligament material properties confirms that calibration of these parameters is critical and using literature values may not be appropriate.
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.