Biering-Sorensen test performance of Japanese young males: comparison with other ethnicities and relationship to electromyography, near-infrared spectroscopy and exertion ratings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Back muscle endurance is a predictor of future low back pain and is commonly assessed using the Biering-Sorensen Test (BST). Differences exist between ethnic groups that may affect the performance and interpretation of the BST and should be investigated. This study's aim was to explore objective and subjective measures of the BST in a Japanese group in comparison with previous studies in other ethnic groups. A total of 27 young male Japanese students performed the BST while measures of muscle fatigue were collected. The mean BST time (152.7 (32.5) s) was greater than the median of the reported mean times in other ethnic groups over the previous decade (128.6 s). Objective measures indicated that the Japanese subjects' lumbar muscles were as fatigued as those of previous studies, while subjective measures appear to indicate that subjects under-reported exertion. The better performance of the Japanese subjects in the BST may reflect physical, psychosocial and lifestyle differences related to ethnicity. STATEMENT OF RELEVANCE: Ergonomics research and practice needs to be applicable to different ethnic groups. Despite the substantial body of evidence on back muscle endurance and indications of potential ethnicity related differences, this had not been previously investigated. These results help ergonomists to interpret physical ergonomics evidence in a multi-ethnic world.
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".