MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7009213435

Differences in Reach Scores Between Three Upper Quarter Y-Balance Test Versions in Older Adults

2023· article· en· W7009213435 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTopSCHOLAR (Western Kentucky University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepeated measures designAnalysis of varianceTest (biology)Older peopleQuarter (Canadian coin)Upper body
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Upper Quarter Y-Balance Test (UQYBT) is often used to measure shoulder mobility and stability and screen for upper extremities musculoskeletal disorders in the physically active and athletic population. Shoulder injuries are typical among older adults, often decreasing the quality of life. There are no studies investigating the functionality of the UQYBT in older adults. PURPOSE: To examine the functionality of the UQYBT and two variations on the older population, 50 years old and older. METHODS: Eight individuals (2 males and 6 females) participated in this study (56.8±3.9 years, 166.0±10.0 cm, 69.6±13.5 kg). Each participant completed a five-minute warm-up on an arm ergometer followed by an arm length measurement. Participants completed the three UQYBT variations in a randomized order; Standard push-up position (SUQYBT), Modified push-up position (MUQYBT), and Wall push-up position (WUQYBT). In each variation, participants completed three reaches in the medial, inferolateral, and superolateral directions for the right and left hands. Highest score for each reach from the different UQYBT variations and supporting hand were saved to further analysis. Relative reach scores were calculated using the right arm length as reference. Composite scores were calculated by averaging the reach scores of the three directions. Repeated measured ANOVAs were used to compare reach score between the UQYBT variations in the older population. This was followed by post-hoc analysis; alpha level was set to 0.05. RESULTS: Significant main effects were identified in the medial reach (p-value CONCLUSION: Several differences were observed between the three UQYBT variations. When the reach was outside of the participant’s base of support (medial and superolateral reaches) WUQYBT had the highest score followed by MUQYBT and last SUQYBT. During the inferolateral reach, participants were able to get similar reach scores between the different UQYBT variations. Further studies should study the option to use the two UQYBT variations in the older population.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTopSCHOLAR (Western Kentucky University)Same topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207