MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138388267

Speed and force validation of an improved intravaginal dynamometer design

2019· article· en· W3138388267 on OpenAlex

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

VenueCMBES Proceedings · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamometerLoad cellPelvic Floor MuscleSimulationForce transducerComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringMechanical engineeringPelvic floorAcousticsEngineeringStructural engineeringMedicineSurgeryPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intravaginal dynamometry can provide reliable and objective assessment of the active and passive properties of the female pelvic floor muscles (PFMs) and associated connective tissues. This work presents a new automated intravaginal dynamometer (IVD) designed to address the limitations of many devices described in the literature, and provides a preliminary mechanical characterization and validation of the system. The new IVD includes dual (anterior and posterior) force measurement probes, minimalistic actuators to reduce IVD size and weight, off-the-shelf components optimized for cost and performance, integrated concurrent electromyography recordings, and an easy-to-use graphic user interface (GUI). IVD load measurements were validated against an Instron® Universal Tester (0-28N) and probe opening speeds were validated using video analysis. A linear regression model was used to quantify the input/output relationship in both cases (α=0.05). While the IVD exhibited -0.828 N bias in load measurements, there was a definitive linear relationship between IVD and Instron® force measurement, with a slope of 0.950 and an excellent model fit (adjR2=1.000). The linear relationships between the GUI set speed of arm opening and true speed measured by video analysis were also excellent (0.958<adjR2<0.991), slopes ranged from 0.874-0.980. The bias and the standard deviation of the bias of speeds ranged from -3.987mm/s to -0.809mm/s and 2.817mm/s to 1.207mm/s, respectively, generally decreasing in magnitude with increasing diameters. While fit was still excellent, speed of opening exhibited lower validity (i.e. lower slopes) at smaller apertures, which may be due to inertia effects. The IVD design presented here demonstrates valid force and speed values during bench testing.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.243 · 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