A comparison of male versus female University of Ontario Institute of Technology students who use electronic or digital devices and technologies with a video display terminal and associated negative health outcomes experienced
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims and Significance: Electronic and digital device and technologies use with Video Display Terminals (VDTs) has increased exponentially. There are negative health effects associated with their use. This study compares VDT use between the sexes and assesses the relationship between VDT exposure and associated potential negative health effects. Methods: A cross-sectional study was employed using self-reported questionnaires to explore the negative health effects associated with VDT use. 278 undergraduate University of Ontario Institute of Technology (University of Ontario Institute of Technology) students in participated in the study of which 65.8% were females (aged between 17-30 years) and 34.2% were males (aged between 18-30 years). Results: Female University of Ontario Institute of Technology students reported more pain in the neck/shoulder/hand and eye discomfort and headaches/migraines in comparison to their male counterparts. Conclusion: This study provide preliminary evidence to suggest that female University of Ontario Institute of Technology students experienced increased negative health effects on exposure to VDTs in comparison to their male counterparts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".