MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387494609 · doi:10.23977/jemm.2023.080404

Human factor ergonomic analysis of cervical cancer intracavitary therapy transport process based on Jack virtual simulation technology

2023· article· en· W4387494609 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wenfeng Wang, Guanglin Shi, Xueyin Yao, Shaojun Chen, Chengjun Feng, Shuai Zhao, Shiming He

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Mechanics and Machinery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCervical cancerMedicineRadiation therapyHealth careSimulation softwareMedical physicsPhysical therapySimulationSoftwareCancerComputer scienceSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the incidence of cervical cancer in women rising year by year, its impact on the physical and mental health of patients as well as their families is becoming more and more significant. At present, hospitals often use intracavitary radiation therapy, and intracavitary therapy transfer bed as a gynecological oncology intracavitary radiation medical auxiliary device plays an extremely important role. Therefore, for the design of intracavitary therapy transfer beds, the validation of man-machine adaptability can well help to optimize its structure. The paper firstly imports the three-dimensional model of intracavitary therapy transfer bed established in UG software into the ergonomics analysis software Jack; secondly, in the analysis environment, it establishes the human body model that conforms to the body dimensions of patients with cervical cancer as well as the human body model of healthcare workers; then, on this basis, it establishes the simulation model for the patient's posture of using the intracavitary therapy transfer bed as well as for different movements of the healthcare workers in the course of the treatment; finally, it analyzes the stresses of the patient's lower limbs, as well as the waist, back, and upper limbs of the healthcare workers through the simulation and analyzes the comfort of the patients and the healthcare personnel with respect to the different movements of the treatment task. The analysis of the simulation results can verify the rationality of the design of the intracavitary therapy transfer bed and the use of comfort, and at the same time, combined with the results of the analysis of the healthcare worker's working posture, to provide an analysis method for the structural optimization of the intracavitary therapy transfer bed.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.303
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering Mechanics and MachinerySame topicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal DisordersFrench-language works237,207