Neuromuscular manifestations of work-related myalgia in women specific to extensor carpi radialis brevis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assessed neuromuscular function in the extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) of female workers diagnosed with work-related myalgia (WRM, n = 14, age 45.2 ± 1.9 years) and the ECRB of healthy controls (CON, n = 10, age 34.6 ± 2.5 years). Groups were compared on voluntary and electrically evoked functional responses at rest (Pre), immediately following a 5 min repetitive task (Post-0) performed at 60% maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), and after 5 min of recovery (Post-5). Despite near complete motor unit activation (MUA) (CON 98% ± 1% vs. WRM 99% ± 1%), at Pre, WRM produced 26% less (P < 0.05) MVC force than CON. Following an MVC, twitch force was increased (P < 0.05) by 94% ± 13% and 54% ± 11% in CON and WRM, respectively (CON vs. WRM; P < 0.05). The peak force and the maximal rates of force development and decline of electrically evoked contractions (10-100 Hz) were generally depressed (P < 0.05) at Post-0 and Post-5 relative to Pre. The response pattern to increasing frequencies of stimulation was not different (P > 0.05) between groups and MUA was not impaired (CON 97% ± 1% vs. WRM 97% ± 1%; P > 0.05). In conclusion, the peripheral weakness observed in the ECRB in WRM at rest does not result in abnormal fatigue or recovery responses after performing a task controlled for relative demand (60% MVC).
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".