Neck Pain and Muscle Function in a Population of CH-146 Helicopter Aircrew
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Neck pain in the Canadian Forces (CF) helicopter community related to night vision goggles (NVG) use is of growing concern. This study compares symptom reports and physiological responses and provides comparison between pilots and flight engineers (FE). METHODS: Aircrew (22 pilots, 18 FE) detailed their neck pain symptoms, flight history, and fitness results. Subjects participated in isometric testing of flexion, extension, and right and left lateral flexion of the cervical spine that included maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) force and 70% MVC endurance trials. Cervical muscles were monitored with electromyography (EMG) and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were collected. RESULTS: Of the aircrew, 53% reported neck pain. No significant differences were observed between pilots and FE with respect to frequency of reporting pain. MVC results were found to differ when extension was compared to flexion and when left flexion was compared to right flexion. Time-to-fatigue (TTF) results were obtained and no significant differences were found between groups. EMG assessment of normalized median frequency indicated fatigue onset while NIRS results changed from baseline for most variables during the time-to-fatigue trials. DISCUSSION: Neck pain in Canadian Forces helicopter crewmembers continues to be an occupational concern. No significant differences between FE and pilot results were found, suggesting that the cause of the pain is likely something common to both aircrew during flight.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".