Assessment of physical exposures and comparison of exposure definitions in a repetitive sawmill occupation: Trim-saw operator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes the physical exposures required to perform a sawmill job associated with a high incidence of upper extremity musculoskeletal injury. Exposure variables are described by multiple posture, exertion and frequency definitions and the comparability of those definitions are examined. Effective industrial prevention efforts require an accurate assessment of risk. Surface electromyography and electrogoniometry were used to quantify the physical exposures of 29 trim-saw operators in four sawmill facilities. Average wrist ranges of motion of 32, 57 and 58 degrees in wrist radial/ulnar deviation, flexion/extension and pronation/supination respectively were required to perform the job. Defining wrist range of motion by the peak postures observed versus those required to perform the primary task resulted in significantly different ranges of motion (p<0.05). Job performance required an average of 33% of maximum voluntary contraction. Repetitions per day ranged from 3,549 to 14,460. Percentage of maximum voluntary contraction was not associated with psychophysical measures of exertion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".