A pragmatic strength and conditioning intervention for firefighters: Feasibility of the Tactical Athlete Resilience Program (TARP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ISSUE ADDRESSED: Firefighting is physically and mentally taxing and recruits are expected to have optimal health and fitness. However, physical fitness tends to decline following initial training, placing firefighters at an increased risk for stress and injury. Efforts are needed to engage and support firefighters in maintaining adequate health and fitness to withstand the rigorous demands of their occupation. This study examined the feasibility of TARP, a pragmatic strength and conditioning intervention for metropolitan-based firefighters, delivered in collaboration with a professional National Rugby League club. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was utilised to examine program implementation, recruitment and sample characteristics, intervention satisfaction and acceptability, and participants' response to the intervention. Evaluation measures included field notes taken during steering committee meetings, participant flow data, baseline and follow-up outcome measures, self-report questionnaires, and telephone interviews with a sample of participants. RESULTS: . Program satisfaction was high (95% very satisfied or somewhat satisfied) among program completers (42% retention). Key strengths of the program included delivery through the professional sports club, quality of facilities and equipment, and scheduling flexibility. Future programs should consider incorporating education or training to support behaviour change maintenance and strategies to retain participants at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide valuable insights into the design and delivery of interventions for firefighters and demonstrate the importance of strong partnerships between community stakeholders.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".