MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587349327 · doi:10.1123/ijatt.2016-0070

Reliability of a Novel Technique for the Measurement of Neck Strength

2017· article· en· W2587349327 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas D. Hall, Marc Morissette, Dean M. Cordingley, Jeff Leiter

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Athletic Therapy & Training · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsPan Am Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntra-rater reliabilityIntraclass correlationReliability (semiconductor)Isometric exerciseInter-rater reliabilityMedicineProtocol (science)Physical therapyMathematicsStatisticsRating scalePsychometricsConfidence intervalInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable assessment of neck strength is required to fully understand the role of decreased neck strength as a risk factor for concussion. The purpose of this study was to assess the intrarater and interrater reliability of a standardized isometric neck-strength-testing protocol using a custom-designed frame, and a digital force gauge. Assessment of intrarater and interrater reliability of a custom neck-strength-testing frame and protocol yielded intraclass correlation values > .890 and > .900 when using maximum peak and average peak values of neck strength, respectively. Our neck-strength-testing frame and protocol provided data of good to excellent reliability, and may be used in future studies to investigate the relationship between neck strength and incidence of injuries.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.224
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Athletic Therapy & TrainingSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207