Trastornos musculoesqueléticos en trabajadores de una fábrica metalmecánica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) represent a growing problem worldwide and among them low back pain is the most common of all, being able to occur in up to 90% of the working population at some time in their life. In addition, TMEs represent the main cause of work disability. Goals: The objective of this study was to determine the level of risk of forced postures and the prevalence of low back pain in workers of a mechanical metal factory Materials and methods: This cross-sectional study used the self-administered Nordic questionnaire for each worker in a metalworking factory to obtain demographic data, characteristics and prevalence of low back pain in the last 12 months. Likewise, the REBA method was used for ergonomic assessment. Results: The prevalence of low back pain in the present study was 83.3% in the workers studied, data that bear similarities to other studies. In this group, low back pain appeared in 50% of the workers in the first year of work and 33.2% after the year. Of these painful conditions, 33.3% were less than one hour, 50% less than 24 hours and 33.3% less than one week. Of the workers 60% required medical attention for this pathology while 40% did not request it. The episodes are repeated once per quarter approximately. Conclusion: This study found that low back pain is common among workers in the metalworking factory. Most workers did not perform physical activity, and lack of exercise was associated with an increased risk of low back pain. Reducing hours of exposure to work in forced postures and increasing exercise in addition to ergonomic intervention can improve this problem.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.008 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".