MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394018908 · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2024.104284

Impact of repetitive mouse clicking on forearm muscle fatigue and mouse aiming performance

2024· article· en· W4394018908 on OpenAlexafffund
Garrick N. Forman, Lucas P. Melchiorre, Michael W.R. Holmes

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Ergonomics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMuscle fatigueForearmPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineUpper limbPhysical therapyElectromyographyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exercise induced performance fatigue has been shown to impair many aspects of fine motor function in the distal upper limb. However, most fatiguing protocols do not reflect the conditions experienced with computer use. The purpose of this study was to determine how a prolonged, low-force mouse clicking fatigue protocol impacts performance fatigue of the distal upper limb for gamers and non-gamers. Participants completed a total of 1 h of mouse clicking at 5 clicks per second. Muscle fatigue and performance were intermittently assessed. RMS amplitude increased for the forearm flexors throughout the fatigue protocol. Accuracy decreased following the first bout of clicking and returned to baseline values after 40-min. EDC and ECU displayed the greatest muscle activity while aiming, producing 11.4% and 12.9% of MVC, respectively. These findings indicate that mouse clicking may not result in performance fatigue, however, high levels of extensor activity may explain common injuries among gamers.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied ErgonomicsSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207