Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 32 references

Framework of a multiscale data-driven DT of the musculoskeletal system

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper proposes MS-DT, a framework for a musculoskeletal digital twin that integrates heterogeneous multiscale data—3D video, IMU and sEMG sensors, ultrasound, CT/MRI, and electronic health records—into a patient-specific virtual…

desk verdict A well-structured architecture paper that overclaims demonstrated effectiveness without reporting a single integrated experiment. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.11821 v2 pith:FWRZHEGX submitted 2025-06-13 eess.IV cs.CV

Martina Paccini , Simone Cammarasana , Giuseppe Patanè This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.IVcs.CV
keywords digitaltwinmusculoskeletalsystemmultiscaleanalysisdataintegrationspinebiomechanicsgraph-basedinferencerehabilitationmedicalimaging
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proposes MS-DT, a framework for a musculoskeletal digital twin that integrates heterogeneous multiscale data—3D video, IMU and sEMG sensors, ultrasound, CT/MRI, and electronic health records—into a patient-specific virtual representation. The framework's central claim is that this two-level data and feature integration yields precise kinematic and dynamic tissue features that support spine biomechanics monitoring, surgical planning, and rehabilitation tracking. A sympathetic reader would care because musculoskeletal disorders are a leading cause of disability, and a validated integration pipeline could move personalised assessment from isolated measurements to a unified clinical tool.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the two-level integration pipeline inside the Connections module. The Human Modelling Engine (HME) builds the patient's biomechanical model and fuses data across macro-, meso-, micro-, and nanoscales; the Inference Engine maps each acquisition system to a feature space and organizes those features into a graph-based patient representation, visualized as a chord graph. The graph is the load-bearing object: it is the structure on which inference (for example, risk of surgery) is performed and the mechanism that makes multimodal, multiscale data actionable.

What would settle it

A prospective study on a cohort of patients with degenerative spinal conditions, in which the MS-DT's graph-based 6–12 month surgical risk score is compared with actual surgical decisions and with predictions from each single modality in isolation; if the integrated score is not more accurate than the best single modality, the central claim of integration-driven insight fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a multiscale, data-driven digital twin of the musculoskeletal system can be assembled from existing, individually validated components. The MS-DT performs a first level of integration by fusing data sources, including markerless US/MR image fusion, grey-level texture mapping of CT/MRI onto 3D spine models, and combination of 3D video descriptors with IMU and sEMG signals, and a second level by organizing extracted features into a chord graph that represents the patient. The inference engine then uses this graph to estimate clinical trajectories, including a probabilistic risk score for surgical intervention within a 6–12 month horizon in degenerative spinal conditions. This integrated representation is intended to support personalized diagnosis, preoperative planning, and rehabilitation monitoring.

Load-bearing premise

The framework's effectiveness rests on the untested premise that combining individually validated components—MR/US fusion, grey-level spine mapping, 3D video descriptors, and sEMG analysis—into one pipeline yields accurate, clinically meaningful inferences, and that the resulting feature graph supports valid risk prediction.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Clinicians can evaluate spinal kinematics, posture, and muscle function from a single integrated representation instead of separate modality-specific reports.
  • The markerless US/MR fusion system supports real-time intraoperative navigation without physical markers, reducing preparation time in surgical workflows.
  • The graph-based inference engine can generate a probabilistic risk score for surgery within 6–12 months for patients with degenerative spinal conditions, informing decisions between surgical and conservative care.
  • Because the framework is acquisition-agnostic, it can incorporate open-source biomechanical tools such as OpenSim, Mokka, FEBio, and 3D Slicer for deeper simulation and analysis.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The framework's clinical value hinges on validating the integrated pipeline end-to-end; the paper reports no such test, so a natural next step is a cohort study comparing the graph-based risk score against actual surgical rates and against predictions from each modality alone.
  • The same chord-graph representation could be extended to other anatomical districts or to non-surgical outcomes, such as response to physiotherapy, by swapping the feature spaces.
  • The inference engine could be concretely implemented with graph neural network methods already used for electronic health records, turning the proposed abstract graph into a trainable predictor.
  • If the integrated graph proves more accurate than individual modalities, it would support the broader thesis that multimodal fusion, not any single sensor, is what unlocks precision in musculoskeletal digital twins.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes MS-DT, a multiscale data-driven digital twin framework for the musculoskeletal system. The framework integrates heterogeneous data sources (3D video, IMU/sEMG, ultrasound, CT/MRI, EHR) through two levels of integration: a data-level fusion into a biomechanical human model, and a feature-level graph-based inference engine meant to support clinical trajectory and risk prediction. The manuscript describes the modular architecture, the data acquisition setup, the human modeling engine, the inference engine, and an interactive visualization platform. It also reports component-level results taken from the authors' prior publications, including a target registration error of 4.3–13 mm in phantoms for the markerless US/MR fusion, and discusses integration with existing open-source tools such as OpenSim and FEBio.

Significance. If the framework were fully implemented and validated, it could offer a valuable integrative platform for patient-specific musculoskeletal assessment and surgical planning. The paper's main strengths are its modular design, its reliance on peer-reviewed component methods with previously published quantitative evaluations, and its explicit acknowledgment in Section 5 that parts of the input data have not yet been tested. However, the current contribution is primarily an architectural proposal: the integrated MS-DT is not implemented or evaluated, and the central inference engine is described only at a conceptual level. As a result, the abstract's claim that 'results demonstrate the effectiveness of MS-DT' is not supported by evidence in the manuscript.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 4.2] The abstract claims that 'results demonstrate the effectiveness of MS-DT in extracting precise kinematic and dynamic tissue features,' but the manuscript reports no metrics for the integrated MS-DT. The only numerical results (TRE 4.3–13 mm in phantoms, 7.4–9 mm in volunteers) are taken from the previously published markerless fusion work [23] and do not validate the integrated pipeline. The authors should either supply an evaluation of the complete framework or revise the abstract and conclusions to describe the work as a proposal.
  2. [Section 4.3] The inference engine is described as the computational core that 'generate[s] a probabilistic risk score' for 6–12 month surgical intervention, yet no graph-construction rule, inference algorithm, training or calibration procedure, or parameter values are provided. Figures 5 and 6 are illustrative rather than results. Because the graph-based inference is one of the four stated contributions, this unspecified component is a load-bearing gap that prevents assessment of the framework's intended functionality.
  3. [Section 5] The paper acknowledges that 'part of the data in input has not yet been tested' and that the framework's accuracy is contingent on input data quality, but it does not discuss whether the individually validated components remain accurate and compatible when combined. No experiment connects the data fusion to clinical outcomes, risk scores, or treatment decisions. The central premise of the framework—that heterogeneous data can be integrated into a clinically meaningful digital twin—is therefore untested.
  4. [Section 4.3] The risk score for surgical intervention is presented as a central output of the framework, but the manuscript gives no evidence that the proposed features (e.g., disc height reduction, kinematic asymmetries, sEMG fatigue signatures) are predictive of the 6–12 month outcome. Without a validation study or at least a clearly specified predictive model, this claim is unsupported and should be reframed as a research hypothesis.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 1] There are multiple typographical errors, including 'paradyghm', 'hep', 'musce-skeletal', and 'markeless'; a careful proofreading pass is needed.
  2. [Section 2] The related work section contains an unresolved citation placeholder '[?]', which must be replaced with the intended reference.
  3. [Section 3] The scale definitions (macro, meso, micro, subcellular/nano) are qualitative; the manuscript would benefit from a table or explicit examples linking each scale to specific measurable quantities and data types.
  4. [Figure 5] The chord graph in Figure 5 is presented without a legend or explanation of its nodes and edges; it is therefore difficult to interpret as a representation of the patient-specific feature space.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the MS-DT framework composes previously published, independently validated components and derives no new result from fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper is an architectural proposal. It does not present a derivation chain in which an output is defined in terms of an input or in which a fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Quantitative values cited (TRE 4.3-13 mm in phantoms, 7.4-9 mm in volunteers) are taken verbatim from the authors' prior markerless fusion paper [23], which contains its own phantom and volunteer evaluation; those numbers are not fit in the present work and are not used to predict a closely related quantity. The component algorithms (skin segmentation, grey-level spine mapping, 3D video descriptors, sEMG metrics) are cited from peer-reviewed publications [18,19,23,25,26,27], and the manuscript does not redefine their outputs. The inference engine of Section 4.3 is described only at a conceptual level - no graph-construction rule, inference algorithm, training procedure, or parameter values are specified - so there is no implemented prediction that could reduce to its inputs by construction. Section 5 itself concedes that some input data 'has not yet been tested' and that 'the accuracy of simulations is contingent upon the quality and completeness of input data.' These are completeness and validation limitations, not circularity. The abstract's claim that 'results demonstrate the effectiveness of MS-DT' is unsupported by any integrated experiment in this paper, but overclaiming or extrapolating external results is a validation gap rather than a self-referential reduction. Under the hard rules, self-citations to independently published and externally falsifiable component evaluations are legitimate evidence and do not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced; MS-DT is a software architecture, not a postulated natural entity. No numbers are fitted to data in this paper, so there are no free parameters. The axioms listed are the domain-level assumptions the framework rests on.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Multiscale data integration yields clinically actionable insights not attainable from single modalities.
    Stated as the core motivation in the Introduction and Section 3, but never demonstrated by an experiment in this paper.
  • ad hoc to paper The feature graph (chord graph) supports inference of clinical trajectory and risk scores.
    Proposed in Section 4.3 without implementation, training, or evaluation; the risk-score claim is speculative.
  • domain assumption Deep learning denoising and super-resolution generalize across modalities and anatomical regions.
    Claimed in Section 4.1 based on the authors' prior work [18, 19], but not demonstrated here for the integrated MS-DT.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Framework of a multiscale data-driven DT of the musculoskeletal system." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FWRZHEGX

@misc{pith2026250611821,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Framework of a multiscale data-driven DT of the musculoskeletal system},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FWRZHEGX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.11821}
}
read the original abstract

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are a leading cause of disability worldwide, requiring advanced diagnostic and therapeutic tools for personalised assessment and treatment. Effective management of MSDs involves the interaction of heterogeneous data sources, making the Digital Twin (DT) paradigm a valuable option. This paper introduces the Musculoskeletal Digital Twin (MS-DT), a novel framework that integrates multiscale biomechanical data with computational modelling to create a detailed, patient-specific representation of the musculoskeletal system. By combining motion capture, ultrasound imaging, electromyography, and medical imaging, the MS-DT enables the analysis of spinal kinematics, posture, and muscle function. An interactive visualisation platform provides clinicians and researchers with an intuitive interface for exploring biomechanical parameters and tracking patient-specific changes. Results demonstrate the effectiveness of MS-DT in extracting precise kinematic and dynamic tissue features, offering a comprehensive tool for monitoring spine biomechanics and rehabilitation. This framework provides high-fidelity modelling and real-time visualization to improve patient-specific diagnosis and intervention planning.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.11821 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. MS-DT framework overview and main component organisation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. 3D visualisation of vertebral landmarks in 3D space with respect to the skin of the subject. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Image fusion implementation, results show millimetre accuracy even with symmetrical anatomical regions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: 3D surfaces and volumetric images integration for spine characterisation:(a) extraction of intervertebral space [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Chord graph representing the single patient. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: MS-DT visualisation interface allows to consider all the available data of the subject and the results obtained [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Super resolution and denoising on musculoskeletal US.. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Physical twin trough 3D printing integration performed in the connections module. The proposed MS-DT framework aims toward a personalised, multi modal data-driven healthcare approach. Leveraging the advancement in 3D printing, we also convert 3D segmented models of sub…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [23]

    Us & mr/ct image fusion with markerless skin registration: A proof of concept

    Martina Paccini, Giacomo Paschina, Stefano De Beni, Andrei Stefanov, Velizar Kolev, and Giuseppe Patanè. Us & mr/ct image fusion with markerless skin registration: A proof of concept. Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine, pages 1–14, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [1]

    Towards a shape-performance integrated digital twin for lumbar spine analysis

    Xiwang He, Yiming Qiu, Xiaonan Lai, Zhonghai Li, Liming Shu, Wei Sun, and Xueguan Song. Towards a shape-performance integrated digital twin for lumbar spine analysis. Digital Twin, 1:8, 11 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [2]

    Digital twin systems for musculoskeletal applications: A current concepts review

    Pedro Diniz, Bernd Grimm, Frederic Garcia, Jennifer Fayad, Christophe Ley, Caroline Mouton, Jacob F Oeding, Michael T Hirschmann, Kristian Samuelsson, and Romain Seil. Digital twin systems for musculoskeletal applications: A current concepts review. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 33(5):1892–1910, 2025

    work page 1910

  4. [3]

    The digital twin in medicine: A key to the future of healthcare? Frontiers in Medicine, 9, 7 2022

    Tianze Sun, Xiwang He, Xueguan Song, Liming Shu, and Zhonghai Li. The digital twin in medicine: A key to the future of healthcare? Frontiers in Medicine, 9, 7 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [4]

    Digital twins: The new frontier for personalized medicine?, 7 2023

    Michaela Cellina, Maurizio Cè, Marco Alì, Giovanni Irmici, Simona Ibba, Elena Caloro, Deborah Fazzini, Giancarlo Oliva, and Sergio Papa. Digital twins: The new frontier for personalized medicine?, 7 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [5]

    Digital twins in healthcare: Is it the beginning of a new era of evidence-based medicine? a critical review, 8 2022

    Patrizio Armeni, Irem Polat, Leonardo Maria De Rossi, Lorenzo Diaferia, Severino Meregalli, and Anna Gatti. Digital twins in healthcare: Is it the beginning of a new era of evidence-based medicine? a critical review, 8 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [6]

    Ana Wooley, Daniel F Silva, and Julia Bitencourt. When is a simulation a digital twin? a systematic literature review-nc-nd license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the namri/sme, 2023

    work page 2023

  8. [7]

    Digital twins for health: a scoping review

    Evangelia Katsoulakis, Qi Wang, Huanmei Wu, Leili Shahriyari, Richard Fletcher, Jinwei Liu, Luke Achenie, Hongfang Liu, Pamela Jackson, Ying Xiao, Tanveer Syeda-Mahmood, Richard Tuli, and Jun Deng. Digital twins for health: a scoping review. npj Digital Medicine, 7, 12 2024

    work page 2024

Show all 32 references
  1. [8]

    From digital human modeling to human digital twin: Framework and perspectives in human factors, 12 2024

    Qiqi He, Li Li, Dai Li, Tao Peng, Xiangying Zhang, Yincheng Cai, Xujun Zhang, and Renzhong Tang. From digital human modeling to human digital twin: Framework and perspectives in human factors, 12 2024. 12 Running Title for Header

    2024

  2. [9]

    Digital twin for digital health: Body joint modeling and 3d pose reconstruction

    Huan Chen, Xiaoye Qian, Yi Cai, Tianyu Lu, Xiaowei Xu, Feng Lin, Shih-Ching Yeh, and Ming-Chun Huang. Digital twin for digital health: Body joint modeling and 3d pose reconstruction. ACM Transactions on Computing for Healthcare, 9 2024

    2024

  3. [10]

    A myoelectric digital twin for fast and realistic modelling in deep learning

    Kostiantyn Maksymenko, Alexander Kenneth Clarke, Irene Mendez Guerra, Samuel Deslauriers-Gauthier, and Dario Farina. A myoelectric digital twin for fast and realistic modelling in deep learning. Nature Communications, 14, 12 2023

    2023

  4. [11]

    Co-simulation of human digital twins and wearable inertial sensors to analyse gait event estimation

    Lena Uhlenberg, Adrian Derungs, and Oliver Amft. Co-simulation of human digital twins and wearable inertial sensors to analyse gait event estimation. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 11, 2023

    2023

  5. [12]

    Digital twins, artificial intelligence, and machine learning technology to identify a real personalized motion axis of the tibiotalar joint for robotics in total ankle arthroplasty

    Philippe Hernigou, Romain Olejnik, Adonis Safar, Sagi Martinov, Jacques Hernigou, and Bruno Ferre. Digital twins, artificial intelligence, and machine learning technology to identify a real personalized motion axis of the tibiotalar joint for robotics in total ankle arthroplas...

    2021

  6. [13]

    Walter, Dukagjin M

    Hossein Ahmadian, Prasath Mageswaran, Benjamin A. Walter, Dukagjin M. Blakaj, Eric C. Bourekas, Ehud Mendel, William S. Marras, and Soheil Soghrati. A digital twin for simulating the vertebroplasty procedure and its impact on mechanical stability of vertebra in cancer patients...

    2022

  7. [14]

    The digital twin: A potential solution for the personalized diagnosis and treatment of musculoskeletal system diseases

    Tianze Sun, Jinzuo Wang, Moran Suo, Xin Liu, Huagui Huang, Jing Zhang, Wentao Zhang, and Zhonghai Li. The digital twin: A potential solution for the personalized diagnosis and treatment of musculoskeletal system diseases. Bioengineering, 10, 6 2023

    2023

  8. [15]

    A model for evaluation of the electric activity and oxygenation in the erector spinae muscle during isometric loading adapted for spine patients

    Lars Ekström, Qiuxia Zhang, Josefin Abrahamson, Joel Beck, Christer Johansson, Olof Westin, Carl Todd, and Adad Baranto. A model for evaluation of the electric activity and oxygenation in the erector spinae muscle during isometric loading adapted for spine patients. Journal of...

    2020

  9. [16]

    Fascial release effects on patients with non-specific cervical or lumbar pain

    Paolo Tozzi, Davide Bongiorno, and Claudio Vitturini. Fascial release effects on patients with non-specific cervical or lumbar pain. Journal of bodywork and movement therapies, 15(4):405–416, 2011

    2011

  10. [17]

    Ab1199 dynamic ultrasound for multilevel evaluation of motion and posture in lower extremity and spine

    RV Bubnov, L Kalika, and L Babenko. Ab1199 dynamic ultrasound for multilevel evaluation of motion and posture in lower extremity and spine. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 77:1699, 2018

    2018

  11. [18]

    Real-time denoising of ultrasound images based on deep learning

    Simone Cammarasana, Paolo Nicolardi, and Giuseppe Patanè. Real-time denoising of ultrasound images based on deep learning. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing, 60(8):2229–2244, 2022

    2022

  12. [19]

    Super-resolution of 2d ultrasound images and videos

    Simone Cammarasana, Paolo Nicolardi, and Giuseppe Patanè. Super-resolution of 2d ultrasound images and videos. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing, 61(10):2511–2526, 2023

    2023

  13. [20]

    Predicting icu interventions: A transparent decision support model based on multivariate time series graph convolutional neural network

    Zhen Xu, Jinjin Guo, Lang Qin, Yuntao Xie, Yao Xiao, Xinran Lin, Qiming Li, and Xinyang Li. Predicting icu interventions: A transparent decision support model based on multivariate time series graph convolutional neural network. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, 2024

    2024

  14. [21]

    Predicting patient readmission risk from medical text via knowledge graph enhanced multiview graph convolution

    Qiuhao Lu, Thien Huu Nguyen, and Dejing Dou. Predicting patient readmission risk from medical text via knowledge graph enhanced multiview graph convolution. In Proceedings of the 44th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, page...

    1990

  15. [22]

    Knowledge-graph-based drug reposi- tioning against COVID-19 by graph convolutional network with attention mechanism

    Mingxuan Che, Kui Yao, Chao Che, Zhangwei Cao, and Fanchen Kong. Knowledge-graph-based drug reposi- tioning against COVID-19 by graph convolutional network with attention mechanism. Future Internet, 13(1):13, 2021

    2021

  16. [24]

    Totalsegmentator: robust segmentation of 104 anatomic structures in ct images

    Jakob Wasserthal, Hanns-Christian Breit, Manfred T Meyer, Maurice Pradella, Daniel Hinck, Alexander W Sauter, Tobias Heye, Daniel T Boll, Joshy Cyriac, Shan Yang, et al. Totalsegmentator: robust segmentation of 104 anatomic structures in ct images. Radiology: Artificial Intell...

    2023

  17. [25]

    Analysis of 3d segmented anatomical districts through grey-levels mapping

    Martina Paccini, Giuseppe Patané, and Michela Spagnuolo. Analysis of 3d segmented anatomical districts through grey-levels mapping. Computers & Graphics, 91:179–188, 2020

    2020

  18. [26]

    3d anatomical modelling and analysis of the spine

    Martina Paccini, Giuseppe Patané, and Michela Spagnuolo. 3d anatomical modelling and analysis of the spine. Research on Biomedical Engineering, 39(4):789–803, 2023

    2023

  19. [27]

    Spatio-temporal analysis and comparison of 3d videos

    Simone Cammarasana and Giuseppe Patanè. Spatio-temporal analysis and comparison of 3d videos. The Visual Computer, 39(4):1335–1350, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    The application of surface electromyography technology in evaluating paraspinal muscle function, 6 2024

    Moran Suo, Lina Zhou, Jinzuo Wang, Huagui Huang, Jing Zhang, Tianze Sun, Xin Liu, Xin Chen, Chunli Song, and Zhonghai Li. The application of surface electromyography technology in evaluating paraspinal muscle function, 6 2024. 13 Running Title for Header

    2024

  21. [29]

    Opensim: open-source software to create and analyze dynamic simulations of movement

    Scott L Delp, Frank C Anderson, Allison S Arnold, Peter Loan, Ayman Habib, Chand T John, Eran Guendelman, and Darryl G Thelen. Opensim: open-source software to create and analyze dynamic simulations of movement. IEEE transactions on biomedical engineering, 54(11):1940–1950, 2007

    1940

  22. [30]

    Biomechanical toolkit: Open-source framework to visualize and process biomechanical data

    Arnaud Barre and Stéphane Armand. Biomechanical toolkit: Open-source framework to visualize and process biomechanical data. Computer methods and programs in biomedicine, 114(1):80–87, 2014

    2014

  23. [31]

    Febio finite element models of the human lumbar spine

    Sean M Finley, Darrel S Brodke, Nicholas T Spina, Christine A DeDen, and Benjamin J Ellis. Febio finite element models of the human lumbar spine. Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering, 21(6):444–452, 2018

    2018

  24. [32]

    3d slicer

    Steve Pieper, Michael Halle, and Ron Kikinis. 3d slicer. In2004 2nd IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging: nano to macro (IEEE Cat No. 04EX821), pages 632–635. IEEE, 2004. 14

    2004

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.