比较使用数字人工智能姿势评估和矫正系统接受姿势训练的个人的姿势评估和意识。

Musa Çankaya, Fatma Nur Takı
{"title":"比较使用数字人工智能姿势评估和矫正系统接受姿势训练的个人的姿势评估和意识。","authors":"Musa Çankaya, Fatma Nur Takı","doi":"10.1080/10803548.2024.2397836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Objectives.</i> This study aimed to compare postural assessment and postural awareness using the artificial intelligence posture evaluation and correction system (APECS) in individuals receiving posture training. <i>Methods.</i> Participants' physical characteristics were recorded. The participants' posture was evaluated with APECS and the New York posture rating chart test (NYPR), and their body and postural awareness was evaluated with the body awareness questionnaire (BAQ), postural awareness form (PAF) and postural habits and awareness scale (PHAS). <i>Results.</i> In the study, results of the PAF (<i>p</i> = 0.000), BAQ (<i>p</i> = 0.013) and PHAS (<i>p</i> = 0.033) were found to be different between the groups. While the groups were similar in the PHAS sub-dimension of postural habit (<i>p</i> = 0.331), there was a significant difference between the groups in postural awareness (<i>p</i> = 0.04). NYPR results of the participants in the group receiving posture training were similar to those in the group not receiving posture training (<i>p</i> = 0.45). <i>Conclusion.</i> Postural deviations measured by digital posture assessment in individuals receiving posture training were significantly different in the group receiving posture training. Postural awareness and body awareness were better in individuals who received posture training than in individuals who did not receive posture training.</p>","PeriodicalId":47704,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of postural assessment and awareness in individuals receiving posture training using the digital AI posture assessment and correction system.\",\"authors\":\"Musa Çankaya, Fatma Nur Takı\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10803548.2024.2397836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>Objectives.</i> This study aimed to compare postural assessment and postural awareness using the artificial intelligence posture evaluation and correction system (APECS) in individuals receiving posture training. <i>Methods.</i> Participants' physical characteristics were recorded. The participants' posture was evaluated with APECS and the New York posture rating chart test (NYPR), and their body and postural awareness was evaluated with the body awareness questionnaire (BAQ), postural awareness form (PAF) and postural habits and awareness scale (PHAS). <i>Results.</i> In the study, results of the PAF (<i>p</i> = 0.000), BAQ (<i>p</i> = 0.013) and PHAS (<i>p</i> = 0.033) were found to be different between the groups. While the groups were similar in the PHAS sub-dimension of postural habit (<i>p</i> = 0.331), there was a significant difference between the groups in postural awareness (<i>p</i> = 0.04). NYPR results of the participants in the group receiving posture training were similar to those in the group not receiving posture training (<i>p</i> = 0.45). <i>Conclusion.</i> Postural deviations measured by digital posture assessment in individuals receiving posture training were significantly different in the group receiving posture training. Postural awareness and body awareness were better in individuals who received posture training than in individuals who did not receive posture training.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47704,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2024.2397836\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ERGONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2024.2397836","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ERGONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究旨在比较使用人工智能姿势评估和矫正系统(APECS)对接受姿势训练的个体进行的姿势评估和姿势意识。研究方法记录参与者的身体特征。使用人工智能姿势评估与矫正系统和纽约姿势评分表测试(NYPR)对参与者的姿势进行评估,并使用身体意识问卷(BAQ)、姿势意识表(PAF)和姿势习惯与意识量表(PHAS)对参与者的身体和姿势意识进行评估。结果。研究发现,PAF(p = 0.000)、BAQ(p = 0.013)和 PHAS(p = 0.033)的结果在各组之间存在差异。虽然两组在 PHAS 的姿势习惯子维度上相似(p = 0.331),但在姿势意识上有显著差异(p = 0.04)。接受姿势训练组与未接受姿势训练组的 NYPR 结果相似(p = 0.45)。结论通过数字姿势评估测得的姿势偏差在接受姿势训练组中存在显著差异。接受姿势训练者的姿势意识和身体意识优于未接受姿势训练者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of postural assessment and awareness in individuals receiving posture training using the digital AI posture assessment and correction system.

Objectives. This study aimed to compare postural assessment and postural awareness using the artificial intelligence posture evaluation and correction system (APECS) in individuals receiving posture training. Methods. Participants' physical characteristics were recorded. The participants' posture was evaluated with APECS and the New York posture rating chart test (NYPR), and their body and postural awareness was evaluated with the body awareness questionnaire (BAQ), postural awareness form (PAF) and postural habits and awareness scale (PHAS). Results. In the study, results of the PAF (p = 0.000), BAQ (p = 0.013) and PHAS (p = 0.033) were found to be different between the groups. While the groups were similar in the PHAS sub-dimension of postural habit (p = 0.331), there was a significant difference between the groups in postural awareness (p = 0.04). NYPR results of the participants in the group receiving posture training were similar to those in the group not receiving posture training (p = 0.45). Conclusion. Postural deviations measured by digital posture assessment in individuals receiving posture training were significantly different in the group receiving posture training. Postural awareness and body awareness were better in individuals who received posture training than in individuals who did not receive posture training.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
152
期刊最新文献
Prediction of human error probability in helicopter to ship transfer operation under an evidential reasoning extended CREAM approach. Comparison of postural assessment and awareness in individuals receiving posture training using the digital AI posture assessment and correction system. Neuro-fuzzy prediction model of occupational injuries in mining. The impact of digital leadership on safety performance - a moderated mediation model. Air rage from the sharp end: cabin crew perspectives on disruptive passenger behaviour in Europe and its impact on occupational safety and well-being
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1