Quantification of reaction forces during sitting pivot transfers performed by individuals with spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To quantify the reaction forces exerted under the hands, feet and buttocks when individuals with spinal cord injury performed sitting pivot transfers. DESIGN: Twelve men with paraplegia completed 3 transfers between seats of the same height (0.5 m high) and 3 transfers to a high target seat (0.6 m high). RESULTS: Greater mean and peak vertical reaction forces were always recorded under the hands compared with the feet (p<0.001) during the transfers. Mean vertical reaction forces were similar between the leading and trailing hands (p>0.088) for the 2 transfers studied. However, the mean vertical reaction force underneath the leading hand was greater when transferring between a seat of the same height compared with one of a higher height (p=0.021) and vice-versa for the trailing hand (p=0.0001). The peak vertical reaction force always occurred earlier (p<0.0001) and was greater underneath the trailing hand compared with the leading one (p<0.02), and reached its highest value when transferring to the high target seat (p=0.003). Peak and mean horizontal reaction forces were always higher underneath the trailing hand compared with the leading hand (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: These results provide evidence-based data to better understand transfers and strengthen clinical practice guidelines targeting the preservation of upper extremity integrity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".