MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6987892283

The use of laboratory and participatory ergonomic research models to investigate working posture in industry

2014· dissertation· en· W6987892283 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Business Development Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du TravailCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationMcGill UniversityGigtforeningen
KeywordsTrunkWork (physics)Task (project management)Lower limbUpper limbBody postureHuman factors and ergonomicsMusculoskeletal disorder
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consensus on physical mechanisms linking work posture to discomfort and disorder risk has not been reached. The objective of this dissertation was to use a series of laboratory studies to identify measurements associated with discomfort and disorder risk in lower limb, back and neck/shoulder regions, and assess how these measurement outcomes differ between standing, seated and sit-standing postures. Participatory intervention methods were also used to investigate workplace factors that impact on posture selection and rotation. In the core set of investigations, healthy participants performed an industrially-modelled box-folding task over three 34-minute sessions in standing, seated and sit-standing postures (developed using a novel foot stand) while lower limb vascular parameters, trunk and upper limb muscular parameters, postural kinetics and discomfort were measured. Links between discomfort in various body regions and changes in the vascular, muscular and kinetic outcomes were investigated within and between postures. Investigation at a partner enterprise was conducted using 'participatory ergonomics' investigation methods and establishment of an "Ergonomics Team". Results show that during standing work, increases in blood volume and postural sway are associated with lower limb discomfort, and initially higher levels of shared activation between bilateral hip musculature are associated with higher levels of back discomfort. In comparison to standing, seated work leads to improved lower limb vascular and discomfort outcomes, but increases muscular demands and discomfort in the back and neck/shoulder regions. Also in comparison to standing, the sit-standing posture led to improved lower limb outcomes, with no significant differences in back and neck/shoulder outcomes. Together, findings reveal that each posture has positive and negative consequences. Data suggests that frequent (15-20min) rotation between postures may prevent onset of unwanted effects. Meanwhile, early investigations at the workplace revealed key policy, work organization and design issues that influenced the choice of appropriate laboratory methods and may affect knowledge uptake related to posture selection and rotation in the plant. As such, an integrated, participatory ergonomics approach may be optimal in ensuring that relevant laboratory methods are developed to produce usable knowledge for the workplace, and key knowledge translation strategies are in place for dissemination back to the workplace.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.505
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.140 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it