The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

The validation of biodynamic models

The validation of biodynamic models
The validation of biodynamic models
Biodynamic models may: (i) represent understanding of how the body moves (i.e., ‘mechanistic models'), (ii) summarise biodynamic measurements (i.e., ‘quantitative models'), and (iii) provide predictions of the effects of motion on human health, comfort or performance (i.e., ‘effects models').
Model validation may involve consideration of evidence used to derive a model, comparison of the model with alternatives, and a comparison between model predictions and independent observations of the predicted qualities or quantities. Models should be associated with a specified range of independent and dependent variables and indicate how intra-subject variability and inter-subject variability are accommodated. Models of the mechanisms of body movement may be validated by demonstrations that the mechanisms are well represented. Models giving numerical predictions (‘quantitative models' and ‘effects models') should specify the expected accuracy of predictions. ‘Effects models' advocated for predicting health, comfort or performance require that: (i) vibration or shock is a proven cause of the specified effect, (ii) within all reasonable ranges of model inputs, there must be reason to expect a positive correlation and acceptable error between the model predictions and the effect, (iii) other variables having a large influence on the effect must be taken into consideration. It is more useful to report the accuracy of ‘quantitative models' and ‘effects models' models than to state that they are ‘validated' or ‘un-validated'.
Checklists for assessing the quality of a biodynamic model are proposed, taking into account the type of model and the model assertions, the evidence, the assumptions, the accuracy, and the appropriateness of the model.
Relevance - Biodynamic models can be used to predict risks of injury or disease. Models can be used to optimise designs in order to minimise predicted risks. However, models can be promulgated and used without knowledge of their accuracy or usefulness.
biodynamic models, vibration, mechanical shock, apparent mass, transmissibility, resonance, validation
0268-0033
S81-S92
Griffin, Michael J.
24112494-9774-40cb-91b7-5b4afe3c41b8
Griffin, Michael J.
24112494-9774-40cb-91b7-5b4afe3c41b8

Griffin, Michael J. (2001) The validation of biodynamic models. Clinical Biomechanics, 16 (1), S81-S92. (doi:10.1016/S0268-0033(00)00101-7).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Biodynamic models may: (i) represent understanding of how the body moves (i.e., ‘mechanistic models'), (ii) summarise biodynamic measurements (i.e., ‘quantitative models'), and (iii) provide predictions of the effects of motion on human health, comfort or performance (i.e., ‘effects models').
Model validation may involve consideration of evidence used to derive a model, comparison of the model with alternatives, and a comparison between model predictions and independent observations of the predicted qualities or quantities. Models should be associated with a specified range of independent and dependent variables and indicate how intra-subject variability and inter-subject variability are accommodated. Models of the mechanisms of body movement may be validated by demonstrations that the mechanisms are well represented. Models giving numerical predictions (‘quantitative models' and ‘effects models') should specify the expected accuracy of predictions. ‘Effects models' advocated for predicting health, comfort or performance require that: (i) vibration or shock is a proven cause of the specified effect, (ii) within all reasonable ranges of model inputs, there must be reason to expect a positive correlation and acceptable error between the model predictions and the effect, (iii) other variables having a large influence on the effect must be taken into consideration. It is more useful to report the accuracy of ‘quantitative models' and ‘effects models' models than to state that they are ‘validated' or ‘un-validated'.
Checklists for assessing the quality of a biodynamic model are proposed, taking into account the type of model and the model assertions, the evidence, the assumptions, the accuracy, and the appropriateness of the model.
Relevance - Biodynamic models can be used to predict risks of injury or disease. Models can be used to optimise designs in order to minimise predicted risks. However, models can be promulgated and used without knowledge of their accuracy or usefulness.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 2001
Keywords: biodynamic models, vibration, mechanical shock, apparent mass, transmissibility, resonance, validation
Organisations: Human Sciences Group

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 10549
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/10549
ISSN: 0268-0033
PURE UUID: acb5eadf-72c6-4ea1-be45-e381dee0def2
ORCID for Michael J. Griffin: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-0743-9502

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 06 Feb 2006
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 05:00

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Michael J. Griffin ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×