ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2023
A Two-Degree-of-Freedom Knee Model Predicts Full Three-Dimensional Tibiofemoral and Patellofemoral Joint Motion During Functional Activity.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalized musculoskeletal models show that gait biofeedback alters knee cartilage contact mechanics in ACL-reconstructed subjects.Journal of biomechanics · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Six kinematic parameters are needed to fully describe three-dimensional (3D) bone motion at a joint. At the knee, the relative movements of the femur and tibia are often represented by a 1-degree-of-freedom (1-DOF) model with a single flexion-extension axis or a 2-DOF model comprising a flexion-extension axis and an internal-external rotation axis. The primary aim of this study was to determine the accuracy with which 1-DOF and 2-DOF models predict the 3D movements of the femur, tibia and patella during daily activities. Each model was created by fitting polynomial functions to 3D tibiofemoral (TF) and patellofemoral (PF) kinematic data recorded from 10 healthy individuals performing 6 functional activities. Model cross-validation analyses showed that the 2-DOF model predicted 3D knee kinematics more accurately than the 1-DOF model. At the TF joint, mean root-mean-square (RMS) errors across all activities and all participants were 3.4°|mm (deg or mm) for the 1-DOF model and 2.4°|mm for the 2-DOF model. At the PF joint, mean RMS errors were 4.0°|mm and 3.9°|mm for the 1-DOF and 2-DOF models, respectively. These results indicate that a 2-DOF model with two rotations as inputs may be used with confidence to predict the full 3D motion of the knee-joint complex.
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.