Tactile perception and manual dexterity in computer users
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies suggest that sensory input generated during highly repetitive tasks can degrade the sensory representation of the hand and eventually lead to sensory and motor problems. In this study, we investigated whether early changes in tactile perception and manual dexterity could be detected in persons exposed to computer tasks. Performance in tests designed to assess tactile perception (grating orientation task for spatial acuity and roughness discrimination) and manual dexterity (grooved pegboard test) was compared between two groups of healthy individuals, matched for age, gender, and experience, who differed in terms of computer habits. One group consisted of frequent users (FU, > 2 h/day, n = 36) and the other of non or occasional users (OU, < 2 h/day, n = 28). Comparison of performance between groups with subjects sorted by gender revealed significant differences (t-test, p < 0.05) in female, but not male, participants. Grating resolution thresholds at the tip on the second and fifth digits were, on average, 40% higher in female FU (n = 13) than in female OU (n = 10) and performance scores on the dexterity test were significantly higher for the left hand. The results of this study indicate that early signs of deterioration in hand function can be present in persons constantly exposed to computer tasks and that these signs are more readily apparent in women than in men. The loss of tactile spatial acuity found in female FU possibly reflect an early consequence of the degraded sensory representation of the hand resulting from constant repetitions of fine motor tasks.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".