Evaluation of Chairs Used by Students in Hacettepe University in Terms of Fulfilment of Ergonomic Requirements with an Interdisciplinary Study and Ergonomic Design of Chairs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study has been planned as an interdisciplinary study conducted by the Department of Occupational Therapy and the Department of Industry Engineering. Aim of this study is to evaluate whether the chairs used by students in our university are ergonomical, to determine musculoskeletal system problems caused by ergonomically inappropriate chairs and to design ergonomically appropriate chairs. Materials and Method: In total 200 students from the Department of Occupational Therapy, the Department of Physiotherapy, the Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, the Department of Industry Engineering, the Department of English Translation and Interpretation, and the Faculty of Medicine have taken place in this study; and 95 of students are female, 105 of them are male. In order to determine problems of students related to musculoskeletal system and ergonomics of chairs; evaluation forms for ergonomic problems, The McGill Pain Questionnaire, Visual Analog Scala and Anthropometric measurements have been conducted. Furthermore, pleasure and expectation questionnaire has been conducted to determine pleasure and expectations of students from chairs. Results: It is planned to design new chairs considering anthropometric measurements and students’ views for use of chairs. conclusion: New chairs that are produced in the light of results, which are obtained from our study and designed appropriately in terms of ergonomics, are aimed to be widely used across the university
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".