ArticleMedicine and science in sports and exercise2025
Strength, Jump Height, Landing, and Mobility Metrics Predict High and Low Performers of a Fire and Move Assessment: A Machine Learning Approach.
Article in Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeCombat maneuverability is critical for soldier survivability. Military organizations ensure effective combat maneuverability through routine assessments. Advanced statistical analyses may improve combat movement efficiency practices. This study grouped physical qualities (e.g., strength, power, mobility) via an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and extracted factors to compare high and low performers and develop predictive models.
methodsThirty-four participants completed two sessions assessing physical qualities and combat movement performance. Participants were classified as either "high" or "low" performers (i.e., completed 50 laps of the assessment or completed less than 50 laps, respectively). An EFA was conducted to reduce physical quality dataset dimensions into specific factors. T -test and effect size compared factors between high and low performers. Logistic regression, multilayer perceptron, and random forest models were trained and tested to classify performers based on factor values. Feature importance scores determined factors most influential in classifying participants.
resultsEFA resulted in four factors (81.46% variance explained). Factor 1 represented isometric strength, jumping, and drop landing ability. Factors 2-4 represent isometric strength and rate of force development in the lower and upper body, and overhead squat ability, respectively. All factors significantly differed between groups, with high performers demonstrating higher mean values than low performers ( P < 0.05). Factor 1 demonstrated a very large effect size ( d = 2.15), whereas factors 2-4 were moderate-large ( d = 0.72-0.81). The logistic regression model had 100% accuracy in the testing phase, whereas other models achieved 86%. Factor 1 was the most influential factor across models (approximately six times more than other factors).
conclusionsUtilized models show military applicability in classifying high or low performers for combat maneuverability. Physical interventions optimizing factor 1 may enhance combat maneuverability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.