MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Work is a Risk Factor for Adolescent Musculoskeletal Pain

2002· article· en· W2025514454 on OpenAlex
Debbie Ehrmann Feldman, Ian Shrier, Michel Rossignol, Lucien Abenhaim

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Arthritis Network
KeywordsMedicineMusculoskeletal painPhysical therapyIncidence (geometry)Odds ratioRisk factorMusculoskeletal disorderConfidence intervalCohortCohort studyBack painHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlEnvironmental healthAlternative medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study objectives were to determine the incidence of musculoskeletal pain in a cohort of adolescents and whether work is a risk factor for its development. 502 students in the seventh to ninth grades responded to a questionnaire at three times over a 12-month period, addressing musculoskeletal health and lifestyle factors. Annual incidence of musculoskeletal pain was 38%. Adolescents who worked developed pain more than those who did not work (adjusted odds ratio (OR): 1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.96, 2.76). Those who worked in white-collar jobs were at a higher risk of developing pain than those in blue-collar jobs or childcare. The conclusion that work is associated with musculoskeletal pain development in adolescents implies that implementation of prevention strategies in the workplace should include adolescents who work.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0040.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.317 · 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