Correlation of Low Back Pain and Its Function Limitation Activity in Daily Life Among Office Worker
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Low back pain is associated with physical demands of the workplace, social support, and pain. The normal degenerative aging process, epidemiological studies reveal that poor ergonomic factors in the workplace contribute to low back pain in a back. Lifting or carrying loads, having a static posture for a long time and frequent bending and twisting have the physical load risk factors consistently associated with work-related back disorders. OBJECTIVE: To correlate the Oswestry Disability Index and Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale in Office worker. METHOD: 110 Office worker were selected for the study and the age between 30 to 45 year. A correlation study was conducted between Oswestry disability index and Quebec Back pain disability scale. Through Digital form. RESULTS: Spearmen’s rho correlation was used for analyse data by using SPSS 20.00. Significant and very strong positive correlation was found between Oswestry disability index and Quebec back pain scale (r=0.91& p<0.05) in Office worker. CONCLUSION: Oswestry disability index and Quebec back pain scale were correlated in Office worker. Significant and very strong positive correlation found between pain and functional activity. Key words: Oswestry disability index, Quebec back pain scale, Pain, Functional Activity, Office worker
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 | 0.011 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".