Lumbar Spine and Pelvic Posture Between Standing and Sitting: A Radiologic Investigation Including Reliability and Repeatability of the Lumbar Lordosis Measure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Sitting has been identified as a cause of mechanical low back pain. The purpose of this study was to use plain film x-rays to measure lumbar spine and pelvic posture differences between standing and sitting. METHODS: Eight male subjects were radiographed standing and sitting in an automobile seat. Measures of lumbar lordosis, intervertebral disk angles, lumbosacral angle, lumbosacral lordosis, and sacral tilt were completed. One-way analysis of variance (alpha = .05) was conducted on the variables stated above. A Bland-Altman analysis was conducted to assess agreement and repeatability of the lumbar lordosis angle using 2 raters. RESULTS: Lumbar lordosis values in standing (average, 63 degrees +/- 15 degrees ) and sacral inclination (average, 43 degrees +/- 10 degrees ) decreased by 43 degrees and 44 degrees , respectively, in sitting. Intervertebral joint angles in sitting underwent substantial flexion (L1/L2-5 degrees [+/-3 degrees ], L2/L3-7 degrees [+/-3 degrees ], L3/L4-8 degrees [+/-3 degrees ], L4/L5-13 degrees [+/-3 degrees ], and L5/S1-4 degrees [+/-10 degrees ]). Measures of lumbar lordosis; intervertebral disk angles between L2/L3, L3/L4, and L4/L5; lumbosacral lordosis; lumbosacral angle; and sacral tilt were significantly decreased between standing and sitting (P < .001). Intervertebral disk angle between L5/S1 was not significantly different. Analysis using the Bland-Altman technique found good agreement and stable repeatability of measures with no statistical significant differences between or within raters (R1, P = .8474; R2, P = .4402; and R-R2, P = .8691). CONCLUSION: The significant differences in lumbar and pelvic measures from standing to sitting further emphasize the range of motion experienced at vertebral levels in sitting. Based on the results of this study, interventions to return motion segments to a less flexed posture should be investigated because they may play a role in preventing injury and low back pain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".