MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904183800 · doi:10.1002/ajim.22929

The relationship between physical fitness and occupational injury in emergency responders: A systematic review

2018· review· en· W2904183800 on OpenAlex
Liana Lentz, Jason R. Randall, Douglas P. Gross, Ambikaipakan Senthilselvan, Don Voaklander

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Industrial Medicine · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMusculoskeletal injuryPhysical fitnessPhysical therapyOccupational safety and healthOccupational injuryInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsTest (biology)Poison controlMedical emergencyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Emergency responders have jobs with physical demands that put them at risk of musculoskeletal injuries. OBJECTIVES: This paper systematically reviews existing literature examining the relationship between fitness and occupational injury in this group. METHODS: Comprehensive electronic searches were conducted using key words relating to musculoskeletal injury, fitness, and emergency responders. RESULTS: Eleven articles included in the review provided limited evidence for the relationship between physical fitness test scores and injury risk. There appears to be a correlation between better aerobic fitness and decreased risk of injury. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of the relationship between aspects of physical fitness and occupational injury in emergency responders is extremely limited. More research is required to expand the knowledge in this area and to draw more definitive conclusions.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.354
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.207 · 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