ArticleEuropean journal of sport science2026
Physical Characteristics of Fast Roping in British Elite Law Enforcement Officers.
Article in European journal of sport science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Physical Characteristics of Fast Roping in British Elite Law Enforcement Officers.European journal of sport science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Elite law enforcement and special forces operators around the world have a unique skill set, including some risky methods of entry into a scene of operation. With fast roping being actively utilized by this population, it is important to gain an understanding of the physical demands of the task. Thirty-seven Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs) completed five 20 ft fast rope descents onto a force platform, three in standard uniform (without kit) and two with the additional weight of operational kit (with kit). Additionally, 12 LEOs were also fitted with electromyography on their dominant arm. Landing forces with and without kit showed no significant difference. Participants with hang test time (HTT) < 35s showed significantly poorer Landing Control (LC) when descending with kit (p < 0.01). Landing control played an important role, with peak landing force significantly higher (p = 0.025) in uncontrolled landings. CMJ breaking impulse and rebound jump height are the main physical measurable predictors. However, when adjusting for body weight and kit, only rebound jump height remained predictive with marginal significance (p = 0.06) (R
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.