Center of rotation locations during lumbar spine movements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to identify and map current literature describing the center of rotation locations and migration paths during lumbar spine movements. INTRODUCTION: Altered lumber spine kinematics has been associated with pain and injury. Intervertebral segments' center of rotations, the point around which spinal segments rotate, are important for determining the features of lumbar spine kinematics and the potential for increased injury risk during movements. Although many studies have investigated the center of rotations of humans' lumbar spine, no review has summarized and organized the state of the science related to center of rotation locations and migration paths of the lumbar spine during lumbar spine movements. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider studies that include human lumbar spines of any age and condition (e.g. heathy, pathological) during lumbar spine movements. Quantitative study designs, including clinical, observational, laboratory biomechanical experimental studies, mathematical and computer modeling studies will be considered. Only studies published in English will be included, and there will be no limit on dates of publication. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library Controlled Register of Trials, CINAHL, ACM Digital Library, Compendex, Inspec, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and dissertation and theses repositories will be searched. After title and abstract screening of identified references, two independent reviewers will screen the full-text of identified studies and extract data. Data will be summarized and categorized, and a comprehensive narrative summary will be presented with the respective results.
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 | 0.004 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".