Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Human subject screening: a dynamic process

S E Popper1, C E Morris, J Briggs

  • 174th AMDS/SGPF, Wright Patterson AFB, OH, USA.

Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine
|November 5, 1997
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Some Like it Hot: Efficiency of the Type III Secretion System has Multiple Thermosensitive Behaviours in the Pseudomonas syringae Complex.

Molecular plant pathology·2025
Same author

Correction to: Genicular Artery Embolisation in Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Knee (GENESIS) Using Permanent Microspheres: Long-Term Results.

Cardiovascular and interventional radiology·2024
Same author

Genicular Artery embolisation in Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Knee (GENESIS) Using Permanent Microspheres: Long-Term Results.

Cardiovascular and interventional radiology·2024
Same author

Operative and non-operative management for intestinal emergencies: findings from a single-centre retrospective cohort study.

Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England·2023
Same author

Computing Geographical Networks Generated by Air-Mass Movement.

GeoHealth·2023
Same author

Early warning scores to assess risk before emergency laparotomy: a reply.

Anaesthesia·2023
Same journal

Goodbye to ASEM.

Aviation, space, and environmental medicine·2014
Same journal

AsMA - a worldwide organization.

Aviation, space, and environmental medicine·2014
Same journal

This month in aerospace medicine history.

Aviation, space, and environmental medicine·2014
Same journal

You're the flight surgeon: hypogonadism.

Aviation, space, and environmental medicine·2014
Same journal

You're the flight surgeon: fatigue.

Aviation, space, and environmental medicine·2014
Same journal

Manned-unmanned teaming: expanding the envelope of UAS operational employment.

Aviation, space, and environmental medicine·2014
See all related articles

Disqualification rates for acceleration panels varied significantly between centrifuge (5%) and impact (18%) facilities. Differences in medical screening criteria and physician interpretation influenced subject selection and research applicability.

Area of Science:

  • Aerospace Medicine
  • Human Factors Research
  • Physiological Research

Background:

  • Historical review of disqualified (DQ) subjects from 1973-1993 at Armstrong Laboratory.
  • Focus on sustained and impact acceleration panels at Wright Patterson AFB.

Purpose of the Study:

  • Analyze disqualification rates and reasons for acceleration panel subjects.
  • Examine the impact of medical screening criteria on subject selection.

Main Methods:

  • Reviewed candidate and subject medical records for screening results and follow-up findings.
  • Analyzed medical screening criteria, influencing factors, and interpretation.
  • Calculated disqualification rates for centrifuge and impact panels.

Main Results:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Centrifuge panel: 5% DQ rate (musculoskeletal 29%, medical 71%).
  • Impact panel: 18% DQ rate (musculoskeletal 71%, medical 29%).
  • Higher DQ rates observed in later years (1989-93) for the impact panel.

Conclusions:

  • Discrepancies in DQ rates attributed to physician variability, screening criteria interpretation, and research type.
  • Screening impacts human subject panel composition and research data applicability.
  • Inappropriate screening may lead to subjects not representing target populations (e.g., pilots), negating research benefits and risks.