MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889760826 · doi:10.1123/jsr.2018-0153

Effect of Lower Limb Muscle Fatigue on Ground Reaction Force Components During Landing in People With Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain

2018· article· en· W2889760826 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ali Jalalvand, Mehrdad Anbarian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sport Rehabilitation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRyerson University
KeywordsContext (archaeology)MedicineGround reaction forcePhysical therapyAnalysis of variancePhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: The link between landing parameters and lower limb muscle fatigue in association with chronic low back pain (CLBP) is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of fatigue on the ground reaction force components during landing in people with nonspecific CLBP. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study. SETTING: Clinical biomechanics laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 44 subjects were equally divided into a healthy group and a group with CLBP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The ground reaction force along anterior-posterior (y) and medial-lateral (x) and vertical (z) axes, time to peak (TTP), the rate of force development, and impulses for all axes were calculated. A repeated-measures analysis of variance (group × fatigue) was used to compare the data among groups. RESULTS: In the unfatigued conditions, the amplitudes of Fy3, Fz2, and TTP of Fy1, Fy2, Fz1, Fz2, Fz3, Fz4, rate of force development in Y in the CLBP subjects are significantly different than those in the healthy subjects (P < .05). In the fatigued conditions, the amplitudes of Fz2, Fz3, Fz4, and TTP of Fy2, Fy3, Fy4, Fz2, impulses of X2, Z in the CLBP group were significantly different than those in the healthy subjects (P < .05). Within-group comparisons of measured Fx1, Fy1, Fy2, Fz2, Fz4 and TTP of Fx1, Fy1, Fy2, Fz2, Fz3, Fz4, impulses of X2, z were significantly different from prefatigue to postfatigue in the healthy group (P < .05). Within-group comparisons of measured Fx1, Fy1, Fz1, Fz2 and TTP of Fx5, Fz1, impulses of X2 were significantly differed from prefatigue to postfatigue in the CLBP group (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: It seems that TTP of ground reaction force variables in CLBP may have clinical values for rehabilitation. Muscle fatigue altered landing performance. However, patients with CLBP will respond differently to lower-extremity fatigue. These altered variables in patients with low back pain are the cause of future injuries or lower-extremity injuries that need to be addressed in further studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sport RehabilitationSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207