Sitting Pressure in the Tilted Position
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To test the hypothesis that, in comparison with a heavier, larger and more expensive manual tilt-in-space wheelchair, a lightweight manual wheelchair equipped with new rear antitip devices provides comparable mean sitting pressures in the tilted position, each of eight able-bodied participants sat for 8 mins in each wheelchair, upright, and tilted back (38-39 degrees). The mean (+/-SD) sitting pressures (of all active sensors in a force-sensing array) at the eighth minute in the upright and tilted positions with the new rear antitip device wheelchair were 58.6 (+/-14.0) and 45.8 (+/-9.3) mm Hg (a 20.7% reduction) (P = 0.005). For the tilt-in-space wheelchair, the mean values were 55.7 (+/-13.9) and 47.2 (+/-10.8) mm Hg (a 26.3% reduction) (P = 0.008). There were no significant differences between the wheelchairs in the upright (P = 0.843) or tilted (P = 0.624) positions. A lightweight manual wheelchair equipped with a new rear antitip device provides equivalent reductions of sitting pressures in the tilted position to a comparably tilted tilt-in-space wheelchair.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".