2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.10.039
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Femur shape prediction by multiple regression based on quadric surface fitting

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…At the distal femur the differences observed among JCSs were small (<5° in the 93% of estimations) but not negligible, therefore the choice of the algorithm, e.g. fitting ellipsoids (Sholukha et al, 2011) or spheres (Yin et al, 2015) to the femoral condyles articular surface, must be justified with careful functional anatomy considerations relevant to the research question. At the proximal tibia, the mechanical axis (Y axis) was similar between Kai-Tibia and GIBOC algorithms (range: 0.9°-2.9°) but less for Miranda-Tibia (up to 7°).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At the distal femur the differences observed among JCSs were small (<5° in the 93% of estimations) but not negligible, therefore the choice of the algorithm, e.g. fitting ellipsoids (Sholukha et al, 2011) or spheres (Yin et al, 2015) to the femoral condyles articular surface, must be justified with careful functional anatomy considerations relevant to the research question. At the proximal tibia, the mechanical axis (Y axis) was similar between Kai-Tibia and GIBOC algorithms (range: 0.9°-2.9°) but less for Miranda-Tibia (up to 7°).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…which are generally known and presented in [6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. Accurate 3D models of human bones are in the majority of cases created on the basis of the geometrical data acquired from the three-dimensional medical scanning devices (like Computer Tomography CT, 3D Ultrasound), or on the basis of two or more 2D images from two-dimensional scanning devices (X-ray or Ultrasound) [8][9][10][11][12][13]. Possible shortcoming of this approach is the inability to create a model of complete bone in cases of missing bone data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Geometric entities of predictive models are described by parametric functions, whose arguments are morphometric parameters that can be acquired and measured from medical images. In order to create such models various statistical and numerical methods can be used as described in [7,[10][11][12]. Morphometric parameters are dimensional values which are defined in field of medical morphometrics and they are essential for the successful application of predictive models.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Predictive methods enable the creation of bone geometrical models by using various types of parametric (statistical) models. These methods can provide valid geometrical models, but they are limited by the input set of the bone samples, type of the applied method, and by the number and type of the parameters involved [15][16][17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%