MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987312017 · doi:10.1080/1059924x.2013.839977

Preliminary Ergonomic Evaluation of Barn Tasks in Intensive Swine Production

2013· article· en· W1987312017 on OpenAlex
Catherine Trask

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

VenueJournal of Agromedicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBarnTrunkHuman factors and ergonomicsPsychological interventionPhysical therapyWork (physics)Task (project management)Occupational safety and healthPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineEngineeringPoison controlEnvironmental healthNursingMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This exploratory pilot study analyses musculoskeletal symptoms and working exposures of intensive pig barn tasks. Methods included a questionnaire phase to gather information about workers' symptoms and video analysis to assess exposures during typical production tasks. Ninety-two percent of workers reported symptoms in the last 12 months in any body part; 58% reported interruption of work activities in the last 12 months. The task "moving dead pigs" exceeded 3400 N during 6 of 18 observations. Frequency of hand gripping and trunk bending >45 degrees were moderate to high in many tasks. These biomechanical exposures suggest a need for further study, particularly on interventions to limit bending, lifting, and repetitive gripping.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.283 · 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