MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127447699 · doi:10.2174/1875934300902010017

Decrements Encountered when Wearing Hazardous Materials Gloves

2009· article· en· W2127447699 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Dubrowski, Vicki R. LeBlanc, Russell D. MacDonald, James Larmer, Monate Praamsma, Heather Carnahan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Ergonomics Open Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoThe Wilson Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHazardous wasteForensic engineeringEngineeringWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hazardous materials gloves (HAZMAT) are frequently worn when performing clinical technical skills, but it is unclear how sensory and motor performance is affected in these circumstances.In Experiment 1, two timed standardized manual dexterity tests, and a test of sensory function were administered.Glove use resulted in a decreased ability to manipulate small objects and a decreased sensitivity to light touch.However, the ability to manipulate objects with a tool was unaffected by the glove.In Experiment 2, the objects were instrumented with a force/torque sensor and the coefficient of friction between the digits and the object was estimated.An elevation of grasping forces and an increased slipperiness between the digits and the object were observed.In Experiment 3, fingertip placement was quantified with pressure sensitive sheets and revealed a misalignment of the digits.Collectively these results suggest that impairments to motor performance when wearing a glove might be related to misalignment of the digits, associated with sensory decrement.These results can be used in the formulation of protocols for professionals wearing HAZMAT gloves and in the design of tools and HAZ-MAT garments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.130
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.350 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Ergonomics Open JournalSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207