ArticleRoyal Society open science2023
Validation of a musculoskeletal model for simulating muscle mechanics and energetics during diverse human hopping tasks.
Article in Royal Society open science, 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.
- Neuromechanical synergy patterns explain metabolic efficiency differences during the sit-to-walk transition.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Evaluation of internal fixation stability of distal humerus C-type fractures based on musculoskeletal dynamics: finite element analysis under dynamic loading.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Muscle synergy analysis during badminton forehand overhead smash: integrating electromyography and musculoskeletal modeling.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
- Biomechanical analysis of stair walking patterns and their implications for knee health in young males.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Validation of a musculoskeletal model for simulating muscle mechanics and energetics during diverse human hopping tasks.Royal Society open science · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computational musculoskeletal modelling has emerged as an alternative, less-constrained technique to indirect calorimetry for estimating energy expenditure. However, predictions from modelling tools depend on many assumptions around muscle architecture and function and motor control. Therefore, these tools need to continue to be validated if we are to eventually develop subject-specific simulations that can accurately and reliably model rates of energy consumption for any given task. In this study, we used OpenSim software and experimental motion capture data to simulate muscle activations, muscle fascicle dynamics and whole-body metabolic power across mechanically and energetically disparate hopping tasks, and then evaluated these outputs at a group- and individual-level against experimental electromyography, ultrasound and indirect calorimetry data. Comparing simulated and experimental outcomes, we found weak to strong correlations for peak muscle activations, moderate to strong correlations for absolute fascicle shortening and mean shortening velocity, and strong correlations for gross metabolic power. These correlations tended to be stronger on a group-level rather than individual-level. We encourage the community to use our publicly available dataset from SimTK.org to experiment with different musculoskeletal models, muscle models, metabolic cost models, optimal control policies, modelling tools and algorithms, data filtering etc. with subject-specific simulations being a focal goal.
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.