MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7006021586

Sintomas musculoesqueléticos em eletricistas de rede de distribuição de energia Musculoskeletal symptoms among energy distribution network linemen

2009· article· pt· W7006021586 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2009
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Ecology and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDashOccupational exposureOccupational medicineWorkplace safety
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXTUALIZAÇÃO: A presença de sintomas musculoesqueléticos em eletricistas deve ser caracterizada para auxiliar na identificação de fatores de riscos para os distúrbios osteomusculares relacionados ao trabalho (DORT) e para possibilitar implementação de medidas preventivas. OBJETIVO: Avaliar a ocorrência de sintomas de DORT em eletricistas de uma regional de uma empresa de distribuição de energia elétrica, verificar se existiam diferenças entre as funções exercidas quanto à proporção de trabalhadores sintomáticos, e realizar um levantamento preliminar dos principais fatores de riscos presentes. MÉTODOS: Foram avaliados 30 eletricistas do sexo masculino (38,1±5,5 anos), divididos em três equipes conforme a função exercida (ELV=Eletricistas Linha Viva; EEM=Eletricistas Emergência/Manutenção; EC=Eletricistas Comerciais). Sintomas musculoesqueléticos foram identificados em mapa corporal, qualificados pelo Questionário McGill e quantificados por escala numérica. O questionário DASH também foi aplicado para avaliar impacto dos sintomas nos ombros na performance dos trabalhadores. RESULTADOS: 70% dos eletricistas apresentaram ao menos um sintoma musculoesquelético nos ombros, coluna ou joelhos. A equipe ELV apresentou sintomas musculoesqueléticos em 100% dos trabalhadores e maior pontuação no questionário DASH (28±15). A equipe EEM apresentou sintomas em 67% dos trabalhadores e pontuação DASH de 8±11, e a equipe EC apresentou sintomas em 50%, mas sem sintomas nos ombros. A proporção de trabalhadores sintomáticos nos ombros estava associada à função exercida (p=0.02). CONCLUSÕES: Eletricistas avaliados apresentaram alta proporção de trabalhadores sintomáticos, que variou conforme a atividade ocupacional. Intervenções são necessárias para reduzir os riscos de DORT dentre os eletricistas avaliados. BACKGROUND: Linemen should be evaluated regarding the presence of musculoskeletal symptoms to guide the identification of risk factors for development of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) and to allow the implementation of preventive measures. OBJECTIVE: To assess the occurrence of WMSD symptoms among linemen working at a regional branch of an electricity distribution company, to investigate whether there were differences in the proportions of symptomatic workers among the functions performed, and to perform a preliminary survey of the main risk factors present. METHODS: Thirty male linemen (mean age 38.1±5.5 years) were evaluated, divided into three teams according to their job function (Live Line Linemen, LLL; Maintenance/Emergency Linemen, MEL; Commercial Linemen, CL). Musculoskeletal symptoms were identified on a body map, qualified using the McGill questionnaire and quantified using a numerical scale. The DASH questionnaire was also applied to evaluate the impact of the shoulder symptoms on the workers' performance. RESULTS: Seventy percent of the linemen presented at least one musculoskeletal symptom in the shoulders, back or knees. All of the LLL team presented musculoskeletal symptoms and these workers had the highest scores in the DASH questionnaire (28±15). Sixty-seven percent of the MEL team presented symptoms, and their DASH score was 8±11. Fifty percent of the CL team presented symptoms, but none of them had shoulder symptoms. The proportion of workers with shoulder symptoms was related to their job function (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of the linemen presented symptoms which varied according to the occupational activity. Interventions are needed to reduce the risk of WMSD among the linemen evaluated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicPlant Ecology and Taxonomy Studies→French-language works237,207→