MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1717206921 · doi:10.3233/wor-2006-00556

Musculoskeletal symptoms in support staff in a large telecommunication company

2006· article· en· W1717206921 on OpenAlexaff
Mircea Fagarasanu, Shrawan Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueWork · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical therapyMusculoskeletal painMedicineQuestionnaireOffice workersWristWrist painIntervention (counseling)Neck painOperations managementNursingSurgeryEngineeringAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to determine the extent and severity of the musculoskeletal problems in office workers in a telecommunication company. RESEARCH DESIGN: A questionnaire survey was conducted to assess the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders' symptoms, their perceived intensity and interaction with ability to work among office workers. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire and Cornell Hand Discomfort Questionnaire developed by the Human Factors and Ergonomics Laboratory at Cornell University were used on a sample of 140 office workers in a telecommunication company. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Discomfort/pain/ache at the wrist level was reported by 86.5% for the left side and 95.5% for the right side. Additionally, discomfort/pain/ache was reported by 77.5% of the sample for neck and 31% of the sample for the left and 50% for the right shoulder region. At the hand site, the area in the distal proximity of the wrist was the most affected site being indicated in 90% of cases for left side and 95% of cases for the right side. CONCLUSIONS: An overview of problems associated with the body parts in office work may allow targeted prevention and intervention.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorkSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207