ReviewBioMed research international2023
Experimental Methods for Studying the Contact Mechanics of Joints.
Review in BioMed research international, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mechanical testing methods for orthopaedic research : an introduction.Bone & joint research · 2026Article
- Article
- Navigating the Landscape of Dry Assembling Ordered Particle Structures: Can Solvents Become Obsolete?Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2024Review
- The Biomechanics of Musculoskeletal Tissues during Activities of Daily Living: Dynamic Assessment Using Quantitative Transmission-Mode Ultrasound Techniques.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Quantitative gait analysis and prediction using artificial intelligence for patients with gait disorders.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biomechanics researchers often experimentally measure static or fluctuating dynamic contact forces, areas, and stresses at the interface of natural and artificial joints, including the shoulders, elbows, hips, and knees. This information helps explain joint contact mechanics, as well as mechanisms that may contribute to disease, damage, and degradation. Currently, the most common in vitro experimental technique involves a thin pressure-sensitive film inserted into the joint space; but, the film's finite thickness disturbs the joint's ordinary articulation. Similarly, the most common in vivo experimental technique uses video recording of 3D limb motion combined with dynamic analysis of a 3D link-segment model to calculate joint contact force, but this does not provide joint contact area or stress distribution. Moreover, many researchers may be unaware of older or newer alternative techniques that may be more suitable for their particular research application. Thus, this article surveys over 50 years of English-language scientific literature in order to (a) describe the basic working principles, advantages, and disadvantages of each technique, (b) examine the trends among the studies and methods, and (c) make recommendations for future directions. This article will hopefully inform biomechanics investigators about various in vitro and in vivo experimental methods for studying the contact mechanics of joints.
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.