MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007166185 · doi:10.26603/ijspt20200053

BIOMECHANICAL MATCHING OF LOW BACK EXTERNAL DEMANDS DURING THE OPEN- AND CLOSED-CHAIN SIDE BRIDGE

2020· article· en· W3007166185 on OpenAlexaff
Taylor Tuff, Tyson A.C. Beach, Samuel J. Howarth

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Physical Therapy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCanadian Memorial Chiropractic College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChain (unit)ClockwiseGround reaction forceMoment (physics)TrunkStructural engineeringMathematicsOrthodonticsPhysicsGeometryMedicineRotation (mathematics)EngineeringKinematicsBiologyClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The side-bridge (SB) is a commonly used closed-chain task to assess trunk muscle endurance and side-to-side endurance asymmetry. An open-chain variation of the SB, that positions the participant in an inclined side-lying posture, may be useful for those who report shoulder pain or fatigue as the reason for terminating the closed-chain SB. Low back loading demands of the open- and closed-chain variations should be matched to facilitate comparison of SB endurance measures. PURPOSE: To quantify the low back reaction moments during the open- and closed-chain SB and determine the appropriate open-chain angle of inclination that matches the lateral bend moment magnitude of the closed-chain SB. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort. METHODS: Upper body and trunk postural data were obtained during the closed-chain SB and during the open-chain SB at each of four inclination angles from a group of eight healthy male adults. Ground reaction force (GRF) data were also collected during the closed-chain SB. Low back reaction moments were calculated using a static 'top-down' linked segment model in both SB variations. Latent growth modeling was used to determine the angle of inclination in the open-chain SB that produced a low back lateral bend moment that matched the closed-chain SB. Sensitivity of the matching open-chain inclination angle was evaluated by rotating the measured GRF vector from the closed-chain SB by five degrees clockwise and counter-clockwise in the frontal plane. RESULTS: The open-chain inclination angle that best matched the loading demands of the closed-chain SB was 38 ± 12 degrees. Clockwise rotation of the measured GRF in the closed-chain SB increased the matching inclination angle to 56 ± 17 degrees. Counter-clockwise rotation reduced the matching inclination angle to 17 ± 11 degrees. Secondary descriptive analysis of spine posture and off-axis low back moments revealed biomechanically relevant differences between SB positions. CONCLUSION: The average open-chain SB angle of inclination that matched the closed-chain SB approximated the 45-degree recommendation offered in the literature. Differences in spine posture and off-axis low back reaction moments, and the potential impact on holding times, should be considered if using the open-chain SB. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sports Physical TherapySame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207