Head and Trunk Moments of Inertia of Able-Bodied and Unbraced Scoliotic Girls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were to estimate head and trunk's (HT) radii of gyration (K) and moments of inertia (I) in able-bodied and unbraced scoliotic girls using an angular momentum method, to test if the use of mean ratios calculated in this study and given by de Leva present similar values compared to the experimental data, and to determine how these methods behave in estimation of scoliotic HT's K and I with variable Cobb angles. BACKGROUND: Scoliotic HT's I estimated from anthropometric tables can lead to error in joint muscle moment calculations. METHOD: Twenty-one unbraced scoliotic and 20 able-bodied girls participated. HT's I values were calculated using an angular momentum method. RESULTS: Angular momentum method provided greater HT's I for the scoliotic group compared with the able-bodied girls. HT's I obtained by the mean ratios calculated from this study were close to the measured values. Compared with the experimental I, de Leva method provided significantly lower I in the scoliotic group. Scoliotic HT's K and I obtained from angular momentum method showed greater correlations with the Cobb angles. CONCLUSION: The use of mean ratios obtained in this study to estimate HT's K values in unbraced scoliotic girls could overcome the drawbacks of current anthropometric methods. APPLICATION: These results can be used to calculate more precise moments of force during daily activities in scoliotic girls with mild scoliosis and to improve the design of corrective flexible body braces prescribed in cases of rapid interventions in young patients of moderate spinal deformities.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".