Injury prevention education provided during formal drum kit training is associated with lower frequency reporting of playing-related musculoskeletal disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored the relationship between receiving ergonomics/injury prevention education (PrevEd) during formal drum kit training and drummers’ histories of playing-related musculoskeletal disorders (PRMDs) and their engagement in PRMD prevention behaviours. It also explored what they were taught with respect to PrevEd. A mixed-methods analysis of a subset of previously collected survey data ( N = 831) revealed that while 81 per cent of the respondents had completed formal training, only 42 per cent had received PrevEd from their instructors. Respondents who had not received PrevEd were nearly twice as likely to report both lifetime and seven-day histories of PRMD than those who had. They also engaged in warm-ups, cool-downs and exercise significantly less often. Overall, the findings suggest that including PrevEd within drum kit curricula, while reinforcing the importance of regular engagement in optimal PRMD prevention behaviours, warrants further consideration as a primary PRMD prevention strategy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".