Comparing Humeral Kinematic Variability During Farm Task Performance Between Laboratory and Field Agricultural Settings in Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Farmers experience high rates of shoulder injury, necessitating the need to better define the movement demands associated with farm work. Research is needed to determine whether simulating farm work in a laboratory environment will sufficiently capture the movement demands required in authentic agricultural environments. The purpose of this study was to compare variability in farm task performance between laboratory and field locations. METHODS: Inertial measurement units tracked humeral kinematics during four simulated farming work tasks (overhead drill, shovel, climb ladder, seed bag lift) and in three different locations; the laboratory, an agricultural tradeshow ("Ag in Motion"), and individual authentic grain/cattle farms. Ten participants per location were sex and age matched. Mean and peak humeral elevation, mean axial rotation, and peak internal and external rotation joint angles were evaluated for the primary "mover" arm during each of the tasks. Within and between participant variability, as well as differences in task performance across locations were evaluated. RESULTS: = 0.29). However, within variability was comparable across locations for all other outcomes. Between participant variability was lowest in the laboratory in 12/20 outcomes, lowest at Ag in Motion in 7/20 outcomes, and lowest on the farms in only one outcome, suggesting lower between participant variability in the more highly controlled environments. Finally, significant differences in performance were elicited across locations for the overhead drill, shovel, and climb seeder tasks. Generally, lower humeral elevation and axial rotation occurred in the laboratory environment compared to Ag in Motion or the farms. CONCLUSION: Simulating an occupational task in the laboratory may not fully reflect the demands of the task when performed in real-world settings. While greater between participant variability may be unavoidable in-field due to differences in equipment and other environmental variables, the greater humeral elevation and axial rotation demands elicited in the field environments suggest in-field research is necessary to fully capture the complexity of occupational movements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".