MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of Trunk Flexion on the Occupant Neck Response to Anterolateral Whiplash Impacts

2005· article· en· W1999718572 on OpenAlexaff
Shrawan Kumar, Robert Ferrari, Yogesh Narayan, Edgar Ramos Vieira

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrunkMedicineWhiplashTrapezius muscleElectromyographyAnatomyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMuscle contractionPhysical therapyPoison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the response of the cervical muscles to increasing low-velocity anterolateral impacts with the volunteer's trunk flexed to the right and left. METHODS: A total of 20 healthy volunteers were subjected to left anterolateral impacts of 4.0, 7.6, 10.7, and 13.4 m/sec and, sequentially, with trunk flexed either left or right. Bilateral electromyograms (EMGs) of the sternocleidomastoids, trapezii, and splenii capitis were recorded. DESIGN: At an acceleration of 13.4 m/sec, with the trunk flexed left, the left trapezius generated 48% of its maximal voluntary contraction EMG, whereas the right trapezius (contralateral to the left anterolateral impact) generated 38% of this variable. All other muscle generated </=23% of their maximal voluntary contraction EMG, a significant difference from the trapezii (P = 0.005). Similarly, with the trunk flexed to the right under these same conditions, the left trapezius generated 26% and the right trapezius 35% of their maximal voluntary contraction EMG. Again, all other muscles generated significantly less EMG activity, </=22% (P = 0.009). Overall, the EMG responses were of low magnitude compared with known data with the trunk in neutral posture in this direction of impact. CONCLUSIONS: When the subject sits with trunk flexed out of neutral posture at the time of an anterolateral impact, the cervical muscle response is reduced compared with anterolateral impacts with the trunk in neutral posture.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physical Medicine & RehabilitationSame topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207