Exercise training as treatment of neck pain among military helicopter pilots and crew members: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Neck pain is frequent among helicopter pilots and crew (1). The aim of this study was to investigate if an exercise intervention could reduce the prevalence of neck-pain among helicopter pilots and crew. Methods: Thirty-one pilots and thirty-eight crew members were randomized to an exercise-training-group ETG (n=35) or a reference-group REF (n=34). ETG underwent 20 weeks of strength-endurance and coordination training, targeting deep/superficial neck muscles. REF received no training. Primary outcome: Intensity of neck-pain the previous 3-months (11-point numeric box scale) (2) and Pressure-Pain-Threshold (PPT) in the trapezius m. and upper neck extensors. Secondary outcome: Maximal-Voluntary-Contraction (MVC) for cervical flexion/extension and shoulder-elevation. Results: Neck-pain for ETG was (mean±SD) 1.9±1.7 at baseline and 1.8±2.1 at follow-up, and correspondingly for REF 2.4±2.0 and 1.7±1.7. Preliminary intention-to-treat analysis, revealed no significant effect on change in pain or PPT between groups. Further analysis, controlling for training frequency, intensity and volume are pending. Baseline MVC for ETG cervical flexion/extension was 184.4±59.8N and 247.2±63.8N, and for REF 177.4±49.1N and 242.3±62.8N, respectively. At follow-up, cervical extension was significantly improved in ETG compared to REF (P=0.020). Discussion: Specific exercise training significantly increased strength in the neck extensors. Increased strength will reduce load on the cervical spine and potentially alleviate neck-disorders. However, this effect was not significant in the preliminary intention to treat analysis. References: 1. Adam J. Results of NVG-Induced Neck Strain Questionnaire Study in CH-146 Griffon Aircrew. In: (CANADA) DRADT, editor. DTIC Information for the Defense Community; 2004. 2. Kuorinka I, Jonsson B, Kilbom A, Vinterberg H, Bieringsorensen F, Andersson G, et al. Standardized Nordic Questionnaires For The Analysis Of Musculoskeletal Symptoms. Appl Ergon 1987;18(3):233-237.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".