Comparison of Lumbopelvic Movement Patterns in People with and Without Low Back Pain During Stair Descending Task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Decreased lumbar spine control may be associated with early and/ or excessive lumbopelvic motion with trunk and lower extremity movements during functional and daily activities. This study investigated differences in lumbopelvic movement patterns in people with and without low back pain (LBP) during a stair descending (SD) task. Methods: A total of 36 subjects, 18 females with non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) and 18 healthy females, participated in this study. A threedimensional motion capture system was used to record kinematics during the SD task. Results: The results showed that in the LBP group, the start-time of the lumbar muscles occurred early in the movement (P=0.015). Additionally, subjects with LBP showed excessive lumbar spine and pelvic movement during the SD task (P<0.05). Conclusion: LBP patients make early and excessive lumbopelvic movements during a SD task, and this can be an important factor contributing to the development or persistence of their LBP problem. This finding should be considered by clinicians when evaluating functional tasks as part of movementbased examinations and rehabilitation programs for people with LBP
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 | 0.001 | 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".