Clinical feasibility of quantifying the force-time characteristics of spinal mobilizations in the preschool-age pediatric population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• Measuring pediatric mobilization force-time characteristics is challenging. • The calibration method of the force sensor was not accurate. • Chiropractors and legal guardians were enthusiastic to participate. • The fingertip sensor did not alter the clinician’s tactile perception. • The additional time required for the encounters was acceptable. Spinal mobilizations are commonly employed to address neuromusculoskeletal disorders in children. However, there is limited data on the biomechanics of these interventions. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of using a fingertip force sensor to measure the force-time characteristics of spinal mobilizations delivered by chiropractors to children. Chiropractors were recruited through purposive sampling via the research team’s network, targeting those with a pediatric-focused practice and contacted via professional email. A force sensor was attached to their fingertip while they performed spinal mobilizations on patients aged five years and younger. Feasibility was assessed through five elements: recruitment of participants (chiropractors and children), data collection, acceptability and suitability, resources, and data quality. A thematic analysis was performed to categorize information related to each feasibility element into barriers and facilitators. A total of 6 chiropractors and 43 children participated in the study. Recruitment was successful, with all invited chiropractors agreeing to participate and children being recruited through their legal guardians. Data collection was feasible, though challenges with children’s cooperation led to repeated trials. Both chiropractors and legal guardians expressed general satisfaction; the sensor did not impact the clinicians' tactile sensitivity, and treatment time was not extended. Resource management was efficient, with no equipment malfunctions. Issues with sensor calibration and difficulties in visually confirming sensor positioning were noted. Data quality indicated data loss, particularly during cervical mobilization. This study indicates that, while using a fingertip force sensor does not interfere with the treatment process, several challenges, including calibration issues, were identified. These insights provide a basis for improving methodologies in pediatric manual therapy research. This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05607355).
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 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".