MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1629852521 · doi:10.3233/oer-2010-0181

Clinical tools to quantify torso flexion endurance: Normative data from student and firefighter populations

2010· article· en· W1629852521 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational Ergonomics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsCalgary General HospitalUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlankTorsoTest (biology)Physical therapyAnalysis of varianceMedicineSignificant differencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given that torso muscle endurance is one of the few metrics that has been shown to be linked to having a history of back disorders together with predicting future back disorders, endurance tests for workers have been developed. While some data exists on the V-sit exercise for flexor endurance, some have specifically adopted the plank test. The primary objective of this study was to assess links between the two tests. Two data sets were collected. The first set was obtained from a convenience group of fire fighters where the plank endurance test scores, together with the Biering Sorensen test for extension endurance, were obtained over three years. The second data set was obtained from a tightly controlled cross-sectional study of university students that included scores for both flexor and extensor endurance. 620 fire fighters for the first data set and 181 university students for the second. While flexor endurance in the firefighters peaked when aged in their 40's, extensor endurance peaked in their 20's. In the study of university students, the plank scores were relatively higher than the V-sit scores in males but relatively lower than the V-sit in the females. A pearson correlation test between the paired plank and V-sit scores of each subject rendered a coefficient of r =0.34. This means that the performance on one flexor test only predicted 11% of the score in the other. ANOVA comparison of scores based on their history of having had shoulder or back troubles showed no significant link between V-sit or plank scores. The plank scores are not well correlated with the V-sit scores suggesting that the two measure different variables. Since more data exists for the V-sit, measurement of flexor endurance in occupational settings using this test probably forms a stronger link to back injury.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.148
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it