The effect of general duty police ensemble on graded exercise and simulated work performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This 2-part study examined the impact of general duty police ensemble on selected cardiopulmonary responses during incremental treadmill exercise and on simulated work performance in 25 healthy young male and female participants. Part I comprised randomly ordered treadmill tests in 2 experimental conditions: physical training (PT; undergarments, shorts, t-shirt, and running shoes) and police duty ensemble (PDE; undergarments, body armour, patrol uniform, boots, duty belt with required equipment, radio, and weapons). The PDE added 10.3 kg (SD 0.4) or 14% (SD 2) body mass. Participants walked at 5.6 km·h −1 , starting at 0% grade with 2% increases in grade every 2 min. The 4% stage was 6 min in duration to achieve physiological steady state. Subsequently, the 2-min increments continued to exhaustion. Part II evaluated performance time on a recognized job-related work simulation circuit, in 3 experimental conditions: (i) PT, (ii) weighted belt (WB; PT plus a 7.5 kg weighted belt), and (iii) PDE. In Part I, physiological responses (e.g., oxygen uptake, ventilation, heart rate) were elevated (p < 0.05) with PDE during submaximal exercise but peak values were unchanged. Test duration and peak power output were significantly reduced with PDE. In Part II, circuit completion time was increased in PDE but not WB when compared with PT (p < 0.05). Heart rate and perceived exertion were similar in all conditions and perceived dyspnea was higher in PDE. Novelty Police duty ensemble negatively affected exercise performance more than would be expected due to load mass alone. Specificity must be considered when simulating occupational load carriage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".