MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135582364

Physiotherapy with golf players having vertebrogenic disorders

2012· dissertation· cs· W7135582364 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sendi Lagatorová

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2012
Typedissertation
Languagecs
FieldEngineering
TopicSports Dynamics and Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLumbar spineFacet (psychology)Low back painLumbarBack pain
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Title: Physiotherapy with golf players having vertebrogenic disorders Objectives: The goal of the work is to find out and analyze, from selected foreign studies, the causes of the development of the most common pathologies in the lumbar area of the spine in adults, professionals and amateurs and based on the evaluation of the studies suggest appropriate physiotherapeutic procedures to be used as a prevention against low back pain (further LBP). Methods: The work is structured as a research, which has been created on the basis of an analysis of relevant sources. The literature, printed and electronic monographs, textbooks and specialized periodical were obtained from bibliographical databases, library catalogues and the Internet. The work contains foreign studies from USA, Canada, England and Australia. The studies were obtained from specialized medical databases: PubMed, PEDro, EBSCO. Results: The main cause of the development of LBP in golf players is the full golf swing, especially the modern type of swing. The following pathologies mainly develop in the lumbar area of the spine within the golf players: hypertonus paravertebral muscles, prolapses of intervertebral disc, fatigue vertebrae fracture and artrophaty of facet joints. In the prevention of LBP we use physiotherapeutic processes based on...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)Same topicSports Dynamics and BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207