An electromyographic investigation of asymmetric lifting and moving of a load: I. Effects of load lift from floor to target shelves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The range of normalized electromyography (EMG) values when lifting and moving a 5.84 kg box was between 0.12 and 0.77. The right iliocostalis and the right and the left external obliques showed significant increases in muscle activity at 90° of asymmetry. The average percentage increase for the stated muscles was 62.3% when compared to muscle activity at 0°. The left external oblique also responded significantly at 60° of asymmetry when compared to 0°. The knuckle, sternum, and reach heights significantly affected the left iliocostalis and the left and right erector spinae muscles. The average percentage increases in the stated muscles were 74.4% at knuckle height, 126.1% at sternum height, and 143.3% at reach height, when compared to floor level. Significant increases in muscle activity for the right iliocostalis and the right external oblique were registered only at the sternum and at the reach heights. For manual materials handling (MMH), an endeavor should be made to avoid asymmetric lifting and moving at 90° and from the floor level and to the reach height. To minimize the risk of back injury, the MMH task should be performed preferably within an asymmetry of 30° but not exceeding 60° asymmetry. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".