Effect of Box Taping as an Adjunct to Stretching-Strengthening Exercise Program in Correction of Scapular Alignment in People with Forward Shoulder Posture: A Randomised Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. The objective of this study was to provide preliminary estimates of effects of box taping as an adjunct to stretching-strengthening exercise program on scapular alignment in healthy subjects with forward shoulder posture (FSP). Methods. Sixty subjects were screened and 38 asymptomatic subjects with FSP were allocated into box taping and standard treatment group using block randomization. Both groups received a supervised stretching-strengthening exercise program and postural advice for 15 sessions over 3 weeks. In addition, box taping was applied to the intervention group. Static and dynamic scapular alignment was recorded at baseline, 7th and 15th sessions. Differences over time and between the treatment groups were determined using repeated measures of analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results. Twenty subjects completed the study. Both interventions were well tolerated and resulted in improvements in static and dynamic postural indicators over time in both groups ( P<0.05 ) except for dynamic scapular alignment by the 15th session. We were under powered to detect differences between the groups ( P<0.05 ). Conclusions. This study suggests postural exercises improve scapular alignment; but a large RCT is required to determine whether the addition of box taping is indicated, and whether this preventative approach reduces the incidence of upper quarter musculoskeletal disorders. This trial is registered with CTRI/2013/10/004095.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".