TIME VARYING GENDER AND PASSIVE TISSUE RESPONSES TO PROLONGED DRIVING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Prolonged sitting in an automobile seat may alter the passive tissue stiffness of the lumbar spine differentially in males and females. Gender specific ergonomic interventions may be indicated for the automobile seat design. \nPurpose: To compare time-varying passive lumbar spine stiffness in response to a two hour simulated driving trial with time-varying lumbar spine and pelvic postures during sitting in an automobile seat. A secondary purpose was to investigate gender differences in lumbar spine stiffness, seat/occupant pressure profile, discomfort rating and posture. \nMethods: Twenty (10 males, 10 females) subjects with no recent history of back pain were recruited from a university population. Participants completed a simulated driving task for two hours. Passive lumbar range of motion was measured on a customized frictionless jig before, halfway through and at the end of the two-hour driving trial. Changes in the passive moment-angle curves were quantified using the transition zone slopes, breakpoints and maximum lumbar flexion angles. Lumbar spine and pelvic postures were monitored continuously during the simulated driving trial with average and maximum lumbar flexion angles as well as pelvic tilt angles being calculated. \nResults: Both men and women initially demonstrated an increase in transitional zone stiffness after 1 hour of sitting. After 2 hours of sitting, transitional zone stiffness was found to increase in males and decrease in females. During sitting, women were found to sit with significantly greater lumbar flexion than males and to significantly change the amount of lumbar flexion over the 2 hour period of simulated driving. \nConclusions: Postural differences during simulated driving were demonstrated between genders in this study. In order to prevent injury to the passive elements of the spine during prolonged driving, gender specific ergonomic interventions, such as improved lumbar support, are indicated for the automobile seat.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".