ArticleJournal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials2024
In-silico simulation of nanoindentation on bone using a 2D cohesive finite element model.
Article in Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials, 2024. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Proteoglycan Dynamics and Bone Quality: Molecular Regulation to Age-Related Fragility.Biomolecules · 2026Review
- Effect of Regularization on Efficient Modeling and Simulation of Bioinspired Composites Using Cohesive Zone Method.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study proposed and validated a 2D finite element (FE) model for conducting in-silico simulations of in-situ nanoindentation tests on mineralized collagen fibrils (MCF) and the extrafibrillar matrix (EFM) within human cortical bone. Initially, a multiscale cohesive FE model was developed by adapting a previous model of bone lamellae, encompassing both MCF and EFM. Subsequently, nanoindentation tests were simulated in-silico using this model, and the resulting predictions were compared to AFM nanoindentation test data to verify the model's accuracy. The FE model accurately predicted nanoindentation results under wet conditions, closely aligning with outcomes obtained from AFM nanoindentation tests. Specifically, it successfully mirrored the traction/separation curve, nanoindentation modulus, plastic energy dissipation, and plastic energy ratio obtained from AFM nanoindentation tests. Additionally, this in-silico model demonstrated its ability to capture alterations in nanoindentation properties caused by the removal of bound water, by considering corresponding changes in mechanical properties of the collagen phase and the interfaces among bone constituents. Notably, significant changes in the elastic modulus and plastic energy dissipation were observed in both MCF and EFM compartments of bone, consistent with observations in AFM nanoindentation tests. These findings indicate that the proposed in-silico model effectively captures the influence of ultrastructural changes on bone's mechanical properties at sub-lamellar levels. Presently, no experimental methods exist to conduct parametric studies elucidating the ultrastructural origins of bone tissue fragility. The introduction of this in-silico model presents an invaluable tool to bridge this knowledge gap in the future.
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.