ArticleProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine2023
Development and experimental validation of a dynamic numerical model for human articular cartilage.
Article in Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A genetic algorithm optimization framework for the characterization of hyper-viscoelastic materials: application to human articular cartilage.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to create a preliminary set of experimentally validated Finite Element Analysis (FEA) models, in order to predict the dynamic mechanical behaviour of human articular cartilage (AC). Current models consider static loading with limited independent experimental validation, while the models for this study assess dynamic loading of AC, with direct comparison and validation to physical testing. Three different FEA models of AC were constructed, which considered both linear elastic and hyperelastic models; Neo-Hookean and Ogden. Models were validated using the data collected from compression testing of human femoral heads across 0-1.7 MPa (quasi-static tests and dynamic mechanical analysis). The linear elastic model was inadequate, with a 10-fold over prediction of the displacement dynamic amplitude. The Neo-Hookean model accurately predicted the dynamic amplitude but failed to predict the initial compression of the cartilage, with a 10 times overprediction. The Ogden model provided the best results, with both the initial compression lying within one standard deviation of that observed in the validation data set, and the dynamic amplitude of the same order of magnitude. In conclusion, this study has found that the fast dynamic response of human AC is best represented by a third order Ogden model.
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.