A research pilot project to test the efficacy of current pedorthic practices in the Canadian Forces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Impact loading is a major factor in the high prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries among military personnel during operational tasks. One of the therapeutic purposes of a pedorthic approach is to attenuate impact load through footwear and supportive device cushioning. The following research pilot project attempts to investigate this relationship. Vertical acceleration was collected at the fourth lumbar level in 30 members of the Canadian Forces (CF) during two ladder descents on a CF warship. Body weight, time of descent, and a description of footwear and any additional supportive appliances were also collected. None of the evaluated variables were significantly different between members wearing standard issue footwear and medically prescribed footwear and supportive devices. Although the results of this research pilot must be viewed with caution, the preliminary findings of this pilot tends to suggest that the current pedorthic practices may not effectively reduce peak impact forces at the fourth lumbar level of the spine among CF personnel during a selected naval activity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".