ArticleJSES international2025
Modeling the future of shoulder arthroplasty.
Article in JSES international, 2025. 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.
- Anatomic versus reverse total shoulder replacement with an intact rotator cuff: a comparative musculoskeletal simulation study of glenohumeral joint biomechanics.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In patients with advanced shoulder pathology requiring arthroplasty, the goal is to restore optimal function and provide sustained pain relief. However, the capacity to select the ideal reconstruction of a specific patient's shoulder and to predict the resulting functional outcome is limited. Computational modeling of the musculoskeletal system has the potential to expand our foundational knowledge of both the native and prosthetic shoulder joint. Methods: The aim of this review is to describe how computational modeling enables more detailed analyses of the interactions between musculoskeletal anatomy and function and to suggest ways in which this approach may be used to optimize outcomes in patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty. Results: Computational modeling has been used to study shoulder joint biomechanics for more than 30 years. There are specific limitations that need to be addressed to realize the full potential of computational modeling in shoulder arthroplasty. First, more realistic, patient-specific models of the glenohumeral and scapulothoracic joints must be developed. Second, shoulder models must be coupled with accurate in vivo measurements of joint motion to perform more comprehensive analyses of muscle and joint function. Third, model predictions of shoulder biomechanics must be validated against experimental data. Conclusion: Patient-specific musculoskeletal modeling of shoulder joint biomechanics can contribute significantly to predicting pathology and optimizing postoperative function.
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.