MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152917465 · doi:10.1177/87564790122250318

Stretch Exercises

2001· article· en· W2152917465 on OpenAlexaff
Wendy D. Christenssen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of diagnostic medical sonography · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsBurnaby Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Repetitive strain injuries and the signs and symptoms of a musculoskeletal injury are widely recognized as serious hazards for echocardiographers. The aim of this research project was to design, implement, and evaluate an appropriate exercise program and to reduce the reported levels of signs and symptoms that echocardiographers experience in their entire upper body during a working day. Ergonomic task assessments were performed on a group of echocardiographers. The specific muscles that were used were identified, and a stretch exercise program was designed to target those areas. A single blind research study was undertaken with two small groups of echocardiographers with similar work practices. The experimental group was trained in the stretch exercise program and was interviewed monthly while the 12-week study was taking place. The control group was given no information concerning the stretch exercises. Both groups completed pre and post questionnaires and signs and symptoms surveys. At the end of the study, the experimental group reported positive feedback on the stretch exercises and found them very beneficial. A longer, double blind study with more echocardiographers with similar workloads will have to be considered to properly test the designed stretch exercise program and to confirm that it will reduce the reported levels of signs and symptoms of musculoskeletal injury to which echocardiographers are susceptible.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations26
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of diagnostic medical sonographySame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207