Use of Kinetic and Kinematic Data to Evaluate Load Transfer as a Mechanism for Flexion Relaxation in the Lumbar Spine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flexion relaxation (FR) in the low back occurs when load is transferred from the spine's extensor musculature to its passive structures. This study investigated the influence of added upper body mass on low back kinetics and kinematics at the FR onset. Sixteen participants (eight male, eight female) performed standing full forward spine flexion with 0%, 15%, and 30% of their estimated upper body mass added to their shoulders. Electromyographic data were obtained from the lumbar erector spinae. Ground reaction forces and kinematic data from the lower limbs, pelvis, and spine were recorded. Extensor reaction moments (determined using a bottom-up linked segment model) and flexion angles at the FR onset were documented along with the maximum spine flexion. The angle at the FR onset increased significantly with added mass (p < 0.05). Expressing the FR onset angle as a percent of the full range of trunk flexion motion for that condition negated any differences between the added mass conditions. These findings demonstrate that low back kinetics play a role in mediating FR in the lumbar spine.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".