Linearity and sex-specificity of impact force prediction during a fall onto the outstretched hand using a single-damper-model.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the linearity and sex-specificity of damping coefficients used in a single-damper-model (SDM) when predicting impact forces during the worst-case falling scenario from fall heights up to 25 cm. METHODS: Using 3-dimensional motion tracking and an integrated force plate, impact forces and impact velocities were assessed from 10 young adults (5 males; 5 females), falling from planted knees onto outstretched arms, from a random order of drop heights: 3, 5, 7, 10, 15, 20, and 25 cm. We assessed the linearity and sex-specificity between impact forces and impact velocities across all fall heights using analysis of variance linearity test and linear regression, respectively. Significance was accepted at P<0.05. RESULTS: Association between impact forces and impact velocities up to 25 cm was linear (P=0.02). Damping coefficients appeared sex-specific (males: 627 Ns/m, R(2)=0.70; females: 421 Ns/m; R(2)=0.81; sex combined: 532 Ns/m, R(2)=0.61). CONCLUSIONS: A linear damping coefficient used in the SDM proved valid for predicting impact forces from fall heights up to 25 cm. RESULTS suggested the use of sex-specific damping coefficients when estimating impact force using the SDM and calculating the factor-of-risk for wrist fractures.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".