MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947536487 · doi:10.1177/1179562x19849603

Is Pelvic Floor Dysfunction Associated With Development of Transient Low Back Pain During Prolonged Standing? A Protocol

2019· article· en· W2947536487 on OpenAlexaff
Melanie D. Bussey, Daniela Aldabe, Daniel Cury Ribeiro, Stéphanie J. Madill, Stephanie J. Woodley, Niels Hammer

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Medicine Insights Women s Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePelvic floorPelvic Floor MuscleElectromyographyUrinary incontinencePhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPelvic painProspective cohort studyLow back painPelvic floor dysfunctionSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prolonged standing has been associated with an increased prevalence of low back pain (LBP) and is recognized as a potential workplace hazard for employees such as retail staff, assembly line workers, and healthcare personnel. Low back pain is more prevalent in women than in men, and disability due to LBP is worse in women with severe urinary incontinence. However, it is unclear whether pelvic floor dysfunction observed in stress urinary incontinence is a risk factor for LBP. The main purpose of this study is to determine whether co-activation patterns between the pelvic floor and abdominal muscles during a 2-hour prolonged standing task predict transient LBP in women with and without stress urinary incontinence. METHODS: In this is prospective cohort study, 60 female volunteers will stand in a confined area for 2 hours (120 minutes) while performing tasks such as, 'computer work' and 'small object assembly'. The primary outcome measure is transient LBP, which will be monitored every 10 minutes using a numeric pain rating scale. Surface electromyography (EMG) will be collected from the gluteus medius and internal oblique/transverse abdominis muscles, and an intravaginal electrode will be used to monitor pelvic floor muscle activity. The EMG signals will be divided into 12 10-minute blocks to assess changes in co-activation over time. Cross-correlation analyses will be used to quantify co-activation between the muscle pairs (e.g. pelvic floor and internal oblique/transverse abdominis), and the coefficient of co-activation will be expressed as a percentage for each block. A mixed-model regression analysis will be used to determine whether co-activation patterns can predict transient LBP during the prolonged standing task. DISCUSSION: The primary objective of this research is to improve current understanding regarding the role of pelvic floor muscles in the onset of LBP and the potential association between stress urinary incontinence and LBP. These findings have the potential to inform prevention and rehabilitation programmes for women with stress urinary incontinence and LBP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12618000446268 [Protocol Version 2].

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.005

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Medicine Insights Women s HealthSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207