MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007347516 · doi:10.1080/00148130110109694

Adolescent versus adult responses to vertical spinal loading

2001· article· en· W2007347516 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rotsalai Kanlayanaphotporn, Leo Chun Chung Lam, Marie Williams, Patricia Trott, Ian Fulton

Bibliographic record

VenueErgonomics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsCreepMedicineYoung adultMaterials scienceInternal medicineComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study compared the vertical spinal creep response between adolescent and adult males. Thirty healthy male subjects, 15 adolescents (aged 12 to 16 years) and 15 adults (aged 30 to 57 years) were measured. Spinal creep was measured continuously over 25 min under loaded and unloaded conditions using a seated stadiometer that controlled spinal posture. Both adolescent and adult subjects showed significant increase in vertical spinal creep with time but the magnitude of vertical spinal creep was significantly greater in adolescent than in the adult subjects.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueErgonomicsSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207