MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Development of a New Job-Related Physical Test for the Basic Training Program in Police Patrolling

2017· article· en· W2619072801 on OpenAlexaffabout
Claude Lajoie, S. Poirier, Annie Gendron, Louis Laurencelle

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsMontreal Police ServiceUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatrollingTest (biology)Vertical jumpPsychologyCircuit trainingPhysical medicine and rehabilitationApplied psychologyPhysical therapyJumpSimulationComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Based on previous observation and analyses of the basic training program in police patrolling, the main physical abilities required to successfully accomplish the critical and essential tasks of the program were identified. The objective of the study was then to develop and validate a new physical test for the École Nationale de Police du Québec (ENPQ) based on a job related approach sustaining the bona fide occupational requirements criteria. METHODS: Our approach focused both on job task simulation and assessment of specific motor and physiological abilities. Seventeen tasks representing the main physical abilities elicited in the training program were evaluated throughout the test circuit, especially: lower and upper limb power, upper limb strength, global coordination and agility. To validate the test, 184 male and 56 female police students were recruited. Students executed the new ENPQ test and also a series of six ‘convergent’ measures (C): Edgren agility test (C1), dynamometer test for strength (C2), seated medicine ball throw for upper body power (C3), vertical (C4) and horizontal (C5) jump tests for lower limb power, and a maximal aerobic power estimation (C6). Among the experimental group, 39 male and 9 female police students did twice the ENPQ test for establishing test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The new ENPQ test consists of a time circuit including various tasks in continuity, separated by 3 laps: lap 1 (8 tasks), lap 2 (7 tasks) and lap 3 (7 tasks). Mean completion time was significantly different (p<0.001) between male (210 ± 25 sec) and female participants (282 ± 52 sec). Correlation between the ENPQ test time and the six convergent tests were all significant (p<0.01) and moderately high: C1 (r=-0.43), C2 (r=-0.62), C3 (r=-0.59), C4 (r=-0.50), C5 (r=-0.71) and C6 (r=-0.49). Test-retest reliability (n=48) was r=0.81. CONCLUSION: The construction design used for the development of the new test insures per se its content (face) validity. On the other hand, the correlations obtained between the independent six ‘convergent’ ability measures and the new test’s time performance confirm its multi-facetted concurrent validity. As for its predictive, or practical, usefulness for the tightening and betterment of the training standards of future police officers, this remains to be investigated.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicSports Performance and Training→French-language works237,207→