Avaliação física e situações de operacionalidade do policial militar: um estudo correlacional do Teste de Aptidão Física e do PARE-test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introdução: Policiais Militares (PMs) necessitam ter a sua capacidade operacional monitorada e o teste Physical Ability Requirement Evaluation (PARE-test) utilizado pela polícia canadense pode ser um instrumento eficaz, pois mensura a capacidade de perseguir e apreender um suspeito.Objetivo: Avaliar o grau de correlação do teste de aptidão física (TAF) da Polícia Militar do estado do Paraná (PMPR) com o PARE-test adaptado do modelo original canadense. Também, foi objetivo comparar o desempenho físico dos PMs no PARE-test adaptado em duas situações: com uniforme de educação física militar (UEFM) e com uniforme operacional e equipamentos de rotina (FARDA).Métodos: Estudo quasi-experimental que contou com a participação voluntária de 28 PMs classificados para ações operacionais da Companhia de CHOQUE. Os testes do TAF (Shuttle run, tração na barra e teste de 12min), PARE-test UEFM e PARE-test FARDA foram aplicados em dias distintos.Resultados: Houve correlação fraca entre a pontuação do TAF e o desempenho do PARE-test UEFM (r=-0,42; r²=0,17; p<0,05) e FARDA (r=-0,41; r²= 0,17; p<0,05). Houve forte correlação entre o PARE-test UEFM e FARDA (r= 0,88 e r²= 0,78; p<0,001). O teste t pareado revelou diferença estatística significativa (p<0,05) entre o desempenho do PARE-test UEFM (253,9±35,1seg) e FARDA (283,5±38,1seg).Conclusão: A fraca correlação da pontuação do TAF com desempenho do PARE-test adaptado sugere que a classificação do TAF não avalia adequadamente a capacidade operacional do PM em perseguir e apreender de suspeitos. Além disso, o uso da FARDA ocasiona um decréscimo no desempenho físico. Estes achados indicam a necessidade de mais estudos para a criação de novos critérios para pontuação do TAF ou a aplicação de testes físicos mais específicos para avaliar capacidade física operacional de PMs.Physical Evaluation and Operational Situations of the Military Police: A Correlational Study of the Physical Fitness Test and the PARE-testIntroduction: Operational capacity to police officers need to be monitored and the Physical Ability Requirement Evaluation (PARE-test) used by the Canadian police can be an effective tool.Objective: To evaluate the degree of correlation of the police physical test (PPT) of the Military Police of the state of Paraná (PMPR) with the PARE-test adapted from the original Canadian model. Also, we aimed to compare the physical performance of the MPs in the adapted PARE test in two different dress situations: with military physical training uniform (MPTU) and with operational uniform and routine equipment (OURE).Methods: This was a quasi-experimental study that included the voluntary participation of 28 PMs classified for operational actions of the police SHOCK Company. The PPT tests (Shuttle run, bar pull and 12min test), MPTU PARE- test and OURE PARE-test were applied on different days.Results: There was a weak correlation between the PPT score and the performance of the UEFM PARE-test (r = 0.42; r²=0.17; p<0.05) and FARDA (r=-0.41; r²=0.17, p<0.05). There was a strong correlation between the MPTU and OURE PARE-test (r=0.88 and r²= 0.78, p<0.001). The paired t-test revealed a significant statistical difference (p <0.05) between the performance of the MPTU PARE-test (253.9 ± 35.1seg) and OURE (283.5±38.1seg).Conclusion: The weak correlation of PPT performance score with adapted PARE-test suggests that the TAF classification does not adequately evaluate the PM's operational ability to pursue and arrest suspects. In addition, OURE causes a deficit in physical performance. These findings indicate the need for further studies to create new criteria for PPT scoring or more specific physical tests to assess the physical operational capacity of PMs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".