Development of a dynamometer for measuring the isometric force of the pelvic floor musculature
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The aim of this study was to design and develop a dynamometer providing a direct measurement of pelvic floor muscle (PFM) strength. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two pairs of strain gauges were mounted on the moveable branch of a dynamometric speculum allowing measurements at different vaginal apertures. Linearity, repeatability, independence of the site of application of the resultant force to the lower branch of the speculum and hysteresis were tested by means of in vitro calibration studies. RESULTS: The linearity proved excellent over a range of 0-15 N with regression coefficients close to unity between imposed loads and voltage outputs. The slopes and intercepts of the regression lines were not significantly different between repeated sessions, indicating the high reliability of these in vitro measurements. The slopes and intercepts of the calibrations, using the same repertoire of loads imposed at three locations on the moving branch of the dynamometer, were not significantly different, confirming that the force measurement is independent of the site of the force application. Hysteresis was considered to be minimal. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the dynamometer provides reliable measurements. The new device thus appears to have conceptual and measuring advantages over conventional methods and seems to be a very promising instrument for measuring pelvic floor strength.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it