The relationship between core muscle endurance and functional movement screen scores in females with lumbar hyperlordosis: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Core muscle endurance is essential for proper movement and lower extremity injury prevention. In addition, the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) score is a tool to assess body movement patterns to predict the risk of injury. Although various researches have investigated the relationship between the core muscle endurance and the FMS score, no study has ever assessed the effect of postural deformity on the FMS score. This study investigates the relationship between core muscle endurance and FMS scores in females with lumbar hyperlordosis. METHODS: 42 healthy females aged 24.03 ± 4.4 years with hyperlordosis ( > = 45/66 degrees) participated in this study. Core muscle endurance was assessed by the McGill stability test. Correlations were evaluated between the FMS score, McGill test, and lordosis angle using spearman correlation coefficients (p ≤ 0.05). RESULTS: Most individual FMS scores were not correlated with the McGill test except stability trunk push up. Also, lordosis angle was not correlated with the FMS composite score (r=-0.077; p = 0.631), while it was negatively correlated with the McGill test (r=-0.650; p = 0.000). CONCLUSION: The lack of correlation between the FMS score and the McGill test implies that one's level of core endurance may not influence their functional movement patterns. In contrast, the lumbar lordosis angle might impact one's core muscle endurance but not their functional movement patterns.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".