MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993401001 · doi:10.1002/ajim.20461

Daily computer usage correlated with undergraduate students' musculoskeletal symptoms

2007· article· en· W1993401001 on OpenAlexaff
Che‐hsu Chang, Benjamin C. Amick, Cammie Chaumont Menéndez, Jeffrey N. Katz, Peter W. Johnson, Michelle M. Robertson, Jack T. Dennerlein

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Industrial Medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & Health
FundersNational Institute for Occupational Safety and HealthCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsMedicineQuartileOddsOdds ratioPhysical therapyActivities of daily livingComputer softwareConfidence intervalInternal medicineLogistic regressionComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A pilot prospective study was performed to examine the relationships between daily computer usage time and musculoskeletal symptoms on undergraduate students. METHODS: For three separate 1-week study periods distributed over a semester, 27 students reported body part-specific musculoskeletal symptoms three to five times daily. Daily computer usage time for the 24-hr period preceding each symptom report was calculated from computer input device activities measured directly by software loaded on each participant's primary computer. General Estimating Equation models tested the relationships between daily computer usage and symptom reporting. RESULTS: Daily computer usage longer than 3 hr was significantly associated with an odds ratio 1.50 (1.01-2.25) of reporting symptoms. Odds of reporting symptoms also increased with quartiles of daily exposure. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest a potential dose-response relationship between daily computer usage time and musculoskeletal symptoms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations93
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Industrial MedicineSame topicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal DisordersFrench-language works237,207