Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35867281›Full record

ArticleBiomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology2022

The effects of anatomical errors on shoulder kinematics computed using multi-body models.

Maxence Lavaill, Saulo Martelli, Luke Gilliland, Ashish Gupta, Graham Kerr, Peter Pivonka

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Accurate Humeral Version Angle Prediction From Limited Anatomical Data Using Statistical Shape Models.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maxence LavaillSchool of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. maxence.lavaill@qut.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6124-1869
Saulo MartelliSchool of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Luke GillilandQueensland Unit for Advanced Shoulder Research, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Ashish GuptaQueensland Unit for Advanced Shoulder Research, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Graham KerrQueensland Unit for Advanced Shoulder Research, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Peter PivonkaSchool of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Queensland University of Technology · AUGreenslopes Private Hospital · AU

Funding

ARC Industrial Transformation Training Centre for Joint Biomechanics IC190100020Australian Research Council DP180103146Australian Research Council FT180100338
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Joint motion calculated using multi-body models and inverse kinematics presents many advantages over direct marker-based calculations. However, the sensitivity of the computed kinematics is known to be partly caused by the model and could also be influenced by the participants' anthropometry and sex. This study aimed to compare kinematics computed from an anatomical shoulder model based on medical images against a scaled-generic model and quantify the effects of anatomical errors and participants' anthropometry on the calculated joint angles. Twelve participants have had planar shoulder movements experimentally captured in a motion lab, and their shoulder anatomy imaged using an MRI scanner. A shoulder multi-body dynamics model was developed for each participant, using both an image-based approach and a scaled-generic approach. Inverse kinematics have been performed using the two different modelling procedures and the three different experimental motions. Results have been compared using Bland-Altman analysis of agreement and further analysed using multi-linear regressions. Kinematics computed via an anatomical and a scaled-generic shoulder models differed in average from 3.2 to 5.4 degrees depending on the task. The MRI-based model presented smaller limits of agreement to direct kinematics than the scaled-generic model. Finally, the regression model predictors, including anatomical errors, sex, and BMI of the participant, explained from 41 to 80% of the kinematic variability between model types with respect to the task. This study highlighted the consequences of modelling precision, quantified the effects of anatomical errors on the shoulder kinematics, and showed that participants' anthropometry and sex could indirectly affect kinematic outcomes.

Indexed as

ShoulderShoulder JointBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingModels, AnatomicAnatomical errorsImage-basedMulti-body modelScalingShoulder kinematics

Identifiers

PMID35867281
PMCPMC9626434
OpenAlexW4286697760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.