Maximal Voluntary Isometric Neck Strength Deficits in Adults With Whiplash-Associated Disorders and Association With Pain and Fear of Movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study using a cross-sectional, repeated-measures design. OBJECTIVES: To quantify maximal voluntary isometric neck forces in healthy subjects and individuals with whiplash-associated disorder (WAD), using an objective measurement system to evaluate the test-retest properties of these strength measurements and to assess the links between neck strength, pain, kinesiophobia, and catastrophizing in patients with WAD. BACKGROUND: The prognosis of WAD is difficult to predict due to a lack of objective measurement methods and to our limited understanding of the role of psychological factors in the development of chronic WAD symptoms. METHODS AND MEASURES: Fourteen subjects with chronic WAD grade I or II and an age-matched, healthy group (n = 28) participated in this study. Cervical strength was measured with the Multi-Cervical Unit (MCU) in 6 directions, and pain was measured with a visual analog scale. Individuals in the WAD group completed the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), and the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). RESULTS: Significant deficits in strength were observed for the individuals in the WAD group compared to the healthy group, particularly in extension, retraction, and left lateral flexion (P<.05). The MCU demonstrated good intratester reliability for the healthy group (ICC = 0.80-0.92) and the WAD group (ICC = 0.85-0.98), and small standard errors of measurement for both groups. No significant association was found between neck strength and NDI, TSK, and PCS. CONCLUSION: The MCU demonstrated good test-retest properties for healthy subjects and individuals with WAD. Cervical strength was lower in individuals with WAD; however, the strength deficits were not clearly linked with psychological factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".