SynthesisAnnals of biomedical engineering2025
Advances in Musculoskeletal Modeling of the Thoraco-Lumbar Spine: A Comprehensive Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Not just alignment: body shape influences adult spinal deformity biomechanics.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Biomechanical Analysis on Vibration Characteristics of Lumbar Spine Using a Whole Human Body Finite Element Model.International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Machine learning outperforms anthropometric scaling in predicting muscle parameters and spinal loading: a subject-specific musculoskeletal modeling study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Combined Analysis of Gait Cycle and Imaging Parameters in Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation: An Exploratory Study.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Advances in biomechanical modeling of lumbar spine diseases and tumors: gaps, opportunities, and AI integration.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Deep learning-based estimation of sagittal spinal alignment from coronal radiographs.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Segment-specific prediction of vertebral collapse severity in osteoporotic fractures.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Article
- Subject-Specific Musculoskeletal Modeling: The Future of Predicting and Preventing Proximal Junctional Failure in Adult Spinal Deformity.JOR spine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding spine biomechanics is essential for maintaining posture under static and dynamic conditions, relying on a balance of muscular and gravitational forces. Computational musculoskeletal (MSK) models are increasingly being used in biomechanical research as non-invasive alternatives to in vivo and in vitro methods. Two main MSK modeling strategies are multibody (MB) models, which simplify the spine using rigid vertebrae and intervertebral joints to study muscle recruitment, and finite element (FE) models, which provide detailed tissue representation but often rely on oversimplified loading conditions. Recently, coupled (C) models integrating MB and FE approaches have emerged, though they face technical integration challenges. This literature review examines thoracolumbar MSK modeling methods-MB, FE, and C-to outline current practices, evaluate model capabilities, and inform future research and development. Most reviewed models have been published since 2016, reflecting the growing interest and advances in computational spine biomechanics. While certain modeling choices (e.g., the representation of body weight) are consistent across studies, considerable variability remains in other aspects (e.g., the depiction of muscular architecture, including the selection of muscle groups and the number of fascicles used). Despite being critical for model credibility, validation is often constrained by the limited availability of experimental data. Finally, the review highlights emerging directions such as modeling more complex functional tasks, personalizing anatomical and mechanical properties, and promoting Open Science to enhance reproducibility and collaboration in the field.
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.