ReviewNorth American Spine Society journal2023
Finite element modeling of the human cervical spinal cord and its applications: A systematic review.
Review in North American Spine Society journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Review of Finite Element Analysis in Spine Surgery Decision-Making.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Finite Element Analysis of Anterior Odontoid Screw Fixation for Type II Odontoid Fractures.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Review of Motion-Preserving Cervical Spinal Implants and Fusion Constructs.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Modeling and biomechanical characterization of femur and tibia bones using the Extended Mooney-Rivlin approach with mathematical validation.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Context: Finite element modeling (FEM) is an established tool to analyze the biomechanics of complex systems. Advances in computational techniques have led to the increasing use of spinal cord FEMs to study cervical spinal cord pathology. There is considerable variability in the creation of cervical spinal cord FEMs and to date there has been no systematic review of the technique. The aim of this study was to review the uses, techniques, limitations, and applications of FEMs of the human cervical spinal cord. Methods: A literature search was performed through PubMed and Scopus using the words finite element analysis, spinal cord, and biomechanics. Studies were selected based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) use of human spinal cord modeling at the cervical level; (2) model the cervical spinal cord with or without the osteoligamentous spine; and (3) the study should describe an application of the spinal cord FEM. Results: Our search resulted in 369 total publications, 49 underwent reviews of the abstract and full text, and 23 were included in the study. Spinal cord FEMs are used to study spinal cord injury and trauma, pathologic processes, and spine surgery. Considerable variation exists in the derivation of spinal cord geometries, mathematical models, and material properties. Less than 50% of the FEMs incorporate the dura mater, cerebrospinal fluid, nerve roots, and denticulate ligaments. Von Mises stress, and strain of the spinal cord are the most common outputs studied. FEM offers the opportunity for dynamic simulation, but this has been used in only four studies. Conclusions: Spinal cord FEM provides unique insight into the stress and strain of the cervical spinal cord in various pathological conditions and allows for the simulation of surgical procedures. Standardization of modeling parameters, anatomical structures and inclusion of patient-specific data are necessary to improve the clinical translation.
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.