MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1909105081 · doi:10.3233/wor-2008-00698

Case study: Musicians' playing-related injuries

2008· article· en· W1909105081 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

VenueWork · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusicians’ Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresentation (obstetrics)NarrativeCitizen journalismPsychologyFunction (biology)Quality (philosophy)Style (visual arts)Point (geometry)Case presentationMedical educationApplied psychologyMedicineVisual artsComputer scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professional and student musicians are at high risk of acquiring a playing-related injury at some point in their careers. Yet, specialized healthcare for musicians is scarce and expensive for most self-employed musicians. Diagnosing these injuries is challenging, and simply taking a break from an activity that has caused physical problems does not address the ergonomic and biomechanic causes of the problem. Under these circumstances, it is not surprising that musicians are reluctant to seek care, and when they do, lack trust in the care that is provided to them. This article is a case presentation of the experiences of a graduate student musician studying performance at a North American university. A narrative style is used to reflect the quality and nature of experiences this musician encountered, followed by a discussion of how to advance a more participatory and holistic approach to enabling return to function.

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)0.000
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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.260 · 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