Effect of travel direction and wheelchair position on the ease of a caregiver getting an occupied wheelchair across a soft surface: a randomized crossover trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To test the hypotheses that, in comparison with pushing an occupied upright manual wheelchair forward, pulling backward on the push-handles improves the objective and subjective ease with which a caregiver can get the wheelchair across a soft surface (e.g., grass, mud, sand, gravel); and the ease with which a caregiver can get the wheelchair across a soft surface improves if the wheelchair is tipped back into the wheelie position. We used a randomized crossover trial with within-participant comparisons to study 32 able-bodied pairs of simulated caregivers and wheelchair occupants. The caregiving participants moved an occupied manual wheelchair 5 m across a soft surface (7.5-cm-thick gym mats) under four conditions (upright-forward, upright-backward, wheelie-forward and wheelie-backward) in random order. The main outcome measure was time (to the nearest 0.1 s) and the main secondary measure was the ease of performance (5-point Likert scale). The upright-backward condition was the fastest (<i>p</i> < 0.05) and had the highest ease-of-performance scores. In the forward direction, there was no statistically significant difference in the time required between the upright and wheelie positions, but the wheelie position was considered easier. Although further study is needed, our findings suggest that caregivers should pull rather than push occupied wheelchairs across soft surfaces. In the forward direction, caregivers may find the wheelie position easier than the upright condition. These techniques have the potential to both improve the effectiveness of and reduce injuries to caregivers. <b>Clinical Trial Registration Number:</b> NCT 04998539 Caregivers should pull rather than push occupied manual wheelchairs across soft surfaces.In the forward direction, caregivers may find the wheelie position easier than and preferable to the upright condition.These techniques have the potential to both improve the effectiveness of and reduce injuries to caregivers. Caregivers should pull rather than push occupied manual wheelchairs across soft surfaces. In the forward direction, caregivers may find the wheelie position easier than and preferable to the upright condition. These techniques have the potential to both improve the effectiveness of and reduce injuries to caregivers.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".