Vibration of portable orbital sanders and its impact on the development of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in the furniture industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The wood furniture industry has a strong presence in Canada where it employs over 100,000 workers. Because of the extensive number of manual tasks required in this industry, several studies have been undertaken to characterize the health and safety risk factors to which these workers are exposed, such as awkward postures, repetitive movements and the application of undue force. However, very little research has been done on workers' exposure to vibration from portable orbital sanders, one of the most common tools used in this industry. Vibration is responsible for a specific occupational disease called vibration syndrome, but is also recognized as a risk factor that increases the prevalence of more common work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs). This study proposed to determine the level of vibration to which sanders of furniture parts are exposed, and to analyze its impact on the risk of WMSDs. The results show that the level of vibration to which the workers are exposed is well above acceptable levels defined by recognized standards and directives and that this vibration is combined with many other risk factors, thus representing a risk for the development of WMSDs.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".