MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W176971543

Measurement uncertainties during manual wheelchair propulsion and shoulder kinetics

2007· article· en· W176971543 on OpenAlexaff
Guillaume Desroches, Rachid Aïssaoui, Mourad Boukhelif, Daniel Bourbonnais

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverse dynamicsKinematicsPropulsionShoulder jointWheelchairSimulationJoint (building)AccelerationForce platformComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)EngineeringPhysicsStructural engineeringAerospace engineeringClassical mechanicsMedicineControl (management)Surgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Joint forces and moments are often used to estimate the load sustained by joints during a specific task. However,their accuracy is dependent upon the validity of the instrumentation. The SMARTwheel is often used to record the forces and moments exerted by the hand during manual wheelchair propulsion. These forces and moments are then used as inputs to an inverse dynamic model to estimate joint kinetics. A study has shown that this force sensing device as a certain uncertainty (∼1-5%) depending on the variable. Yet no information is available on the impact on the shoulder load of this measurement uncertainty. The purpose of this paper is to compute the uncertainty of the forces and moments measured by the SMARTwheel during manual wheelchair (MWC) propulsion and determine the impact on shoulder kinetics. Fourteen elderly MWC users were tested in an ergometer. They had to propel at submaximal speed (∼ 1m\s) and kinematic and kinetic data were recorded for 10 seconds. Uncertainties on the pushrim forces and moments were computed and added to the initial pushrim kinetics. Inverse dynamic model was used to estimate shoulder joint forces and moments for the initial kinetics condition without and with uncertainty. The results suggest that the uncertainty accounts for variability less than 1 N for the forces and 1 Nm for the moments at the shoulder.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.351
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)Same topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207