ArticleBiomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology2022
Analysis of control strategies for VIVA OpenHBM with active reflexive neck muscles.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting cervical muscle forces in fighter pilots: a comparison of shear wave elastography and PID controllers using finite element analysis.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Biomechanical simulation of the head-neck complex with active muscle control for whiplash injury assessment.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
- Cervical spine injury under multi-axis vibration: effect of active muscles on vibration injury risk.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2025Article
- Neck stabilization through sensory integration of vestibular and visual motion cues.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Finite element human body models with active reflexive muscles suitable for sex based whiplash injury prediction.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Modeling muscle activity in the neck muscles of a finite element (FE) human body model can be based on two biological reflex systems. One approach is to approximate the Vestibulocollic reflex (VCR) function, which maintains the head orientation relative to a fixed reference in space. The second system tries to maintain the head posture relative to the torso, similar to the Cervicocolic reflex (CCR). Strategies to combine these two neck muscle controller approaches in a single head-neck FE model were tested, optimized, and compared to rear-impact volunteer data. The first approach, Combined-Control, assumed that both controllers simultaneously controlled all neck muscle activations. In the second approach, Distributed-Control, one controller was used to regulate activation of the superficial muscles while a different controller acted on deep neck muscles. The results showed that any muscle controller that combined the two approaches was less effective than only using one of VCR- or CCR-based systems on its own. A passive model had the best objective rating for cervical spine kinematics, but the addition of a single active controller provided the best response for both head and cervical spine kinematics. The present study demonstrates the difficulty in completely capturing representative head and cervical spine responses to rear-impact loading and identified a controller capturing the VCR reflex as the best candidate to investigate whiplash injury mechanisms through FE modeling.
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.