These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19308820)

  • 41. Comparing polynomial and cubic spline interpolation of segment angles for estimating L5/S1 net moment during symmetric lifting tasks.
    Xu X; Chang CC; Faber GS; Kingma I; Dennerlein JT
    J Biomech; 2010 Feb; 43(3):583-6. PubMed ID: 19880119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Influence of body segment dynamics on loads at the lumbar spine during lifting.
    Tsuang YH; Schipplein OD; Trafimow JH; Andersson GB
    Ergonomics; 1992 Apr; 35(4):437-44. PubMed ID: 1597174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Lumbar fusion leads to increases in angular motion and stress across sacroiliac joint: a finite element study.
    Ivanov AA; Kiapour A; Ebraheim NA; Goel V
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2009 Mar; 34(5):E162-9. PubMed ID: 19247155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Inter- and intra-observer reliability of calculating cumulative lumbar spine loads.
    Sullivan D; Bryden P; Callaghan JP
    Ergonomics; 2002 Sep; 45(11):788-97. PubMed ID: 12487691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. The time-varying response of the in vivo lumbar spine to dynamic repetitive flexion.
    Parkinson RJ; Beach TA; Callaghan JP
    Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2004 May; 19(4):330-6. PubMed ID: 15109751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. An EMG technique for measuring spinal loading during asymmetric lifting.
    Dolan P; Kingma I; De Looze MP; van Dieen JH; Toussaint HM; Baten CT; Adams MA
    Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2001; 16 Suppl 1():S17-24. PubMed ID: 11275339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Spinal loads during individual and team lifting.
    Dennis GJ; Barrett RS
    Ergonomics; 2002 Aug; 45(10):671-81. PubMed ID: 12437851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. A comprehensive lifting model: beyond the NIOSH lifting equation.
    Hidalgo J; Genaidy A; Karwowski W; Christensen D; Huston R; Stambough J
    Ergonomics; 1997 Sep; 40(9):916-27. PubMed ID: 9306742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Effects of load mass and position on the dynamic loading of the knees, shoulders and lumbar spine during lifting: a musculoskeletal modelling approach.
    Skals S; Bláfoss R; de Zee M; Andersen LL; Andersen MS
    Appl Ergon; 2021 Oct; 96():103491. PubMed ID: 34126573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Usability of the revised NIOSH lifting equation.
    Dempsey PG
    Ergonomics; 2002 Oct; 45(12):817-28. PubMed ID: 12487684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Effect of ship motion on spinal loading during manual lifting.
    Faber GS; Kingma I; Delleman NJ; van Dieën JH
    Ergonomics; 2008 Sep; 51(9):1426-40. PubMed ID: 18802823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Comparison of prediction models for the compression force on the lumbosacral disc.
    Kee D; Chung MK
    Ergonomics; 1996 Dec; 39(12):1419-29. PubMed ID: 8969128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Interpolation of segment Euler angles can provide a robust estimation of segment angular trajectories during asymmetric lifting tasks.
    Xu X; Chang CC; Faber GS; Kingma I; Dennerlein JT
    J Biomech; 2010 Jul; 43(10):2043-8. PubMed ID: 20378116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. A simple polynomial that predicts low-back compression during complex 3-D tasks.
    McGill SM; Norman RW; Cholewicki J
    Ergonomics; 1996 Sep; 39(9):1107-18. PubMed ID: 8681932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Estimating 3-D L5/S1 moments during manual lifting using a video coding system: validity and interrater reliability.
    Xu X; Chang CC; Faber GS; Kingma I; Dennerlein JT
    Hum Factors; 2012 Dec; 54(6):1053-65. PubMed ID: 23397813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Multi-segment trunk kinematics during a loaded lifting task for elderly and young subjects.
    Burgess RJ; Hillier S; Keogh D; Kollmitzer J; Oddsson L
    Ergonomics; 2009 Feb; 52(2):222-31. PubMed ID: 19296316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Biomechanical differences between expert and novice workers in a manual material handling task.
    Plamondon A; Denis D; Delisle A; Lariviere C; Salazar E;
    Ergonomics; 2010 Oct; 53(10):1239-53. PubMed ID: 20865607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Comparison of 3D dynamic virtual model to link segment model for estimation of net L4/L5 reaction moments during lifting.
    Abdoli-Eramaki M; Stevenson JM; Agnew MJ; Kamalzadeh A
    Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin; 2009 Apr; 12(2):227-37. PubMed ID: 18949651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Asymmetric low back loading in asymmetric lifting movements is not prevented by pelvic twist.
    Kingma I; van Dieën JH; de Looze M; Toussaint HM; Dolan P; Baten CT
    J Biomech; 1998 Jun; 31(6):527-34. PubMed ID: 9755037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Influence of snow shovel shaft configuration on lumbosacral biomechanics during a load-lifting task.
    Lewinson RT; Rouhi G; Robertson DG
    Appl Ergon; 2014 Mar; 45(2):234-8. PubMed ID: 23845725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.