Normative Data for the Functional Movement Screen in Middle-Aged Adults
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
The functional movement screen (FMS) is an easily administered and noninvasive tool for identifying weaknesses and asymmetry during exercises and daily activity. The clinical utility of FMS is currently limited by its lack of normative reference values. This study aimed to fill this void by providing normative reference values for healthy, middle-aged adults. Furthermore, we hypothesized that FMS would be affected by other factors such as age, body mass index (BMI), exercise participation, and Balance Error Scoring System scores. Six hundred and twenty-two healthy adults were assessed based on their performance on the 7-Point FMS. A higher level of exercise participation was associated with higher FMS scores, whereas higher BMI and age were associated with lower FMS scores. There was a significant difference between individuals with high (>30) and moderate BMIs (F[621] = 33.98, p < 0.0001). The normative reference values presented can be used in clinical practice to identify abnormal scores across a broad age spectrum.
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 | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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