Incidence of Low Back Pain and Disability among Postal Office Workers by using Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to assess the incidence of low back pain disability among postal office workers by using the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS). The present study was also to understand about how this discomfort affected their daily activities and work performance. The Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire (CMDQ) was used to assess the frequency, severity, and extent to which musculoskeletal discomfort interfered with their work in the past week. The research was conducted among the postal office worker in several region of Navi Mumbai, total 80 participants were voluntarily participated, self-administered questionnaires and data collection sheet were given. The data were statistically analyzed using MS excel. The incidence of low-back pain among postal office workers was high, due to their nature of job which requires prolonged sitting in inappropriate postures, use of computer frequently and lack of physical exercise. Therefore, workplace ergonomics measure and therapeutic interventions are recommended to minimize the burden of low back pain among postal office workers.
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.
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 | 0.033 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it