ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
Acute motor-cognitive responses to a bouldering fatigue protocol in indoor recreational climbers.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the impact of an ecological bouldering fatigue protocol and quantify acute changes in climbing-specific motor performance and visuospatial working memory in indoor climbers. Methods: Non-randomised pre-post study in 28 indoor boulderers (18 male, 10 females; 15-34 years). Participants attempted sex- and skill-matched problems on a 15° overhanging Kilter Board to volitional exhaustion. Pre- and post-fatigue assessments included finger-hang endurance, pinch-grip strength, explosive pulling power, static balance, upper-limb dynamic stability, and visuospatial working memory. Results: The protocol achieved all feasibility criteria. The intervention produced physiological stress (heart rate +60 bpm from baseline: 118.9 ± 22.0 to 178.6 ± 11.1; RPE 14.7 ± 1.8) and forearm-related termination in 75%. Performance changes: finger-hang endurance -34.2% (d Conclusion: A brief, standardised, sex- and skill-matched bouldering protocol was feasible and induced climbing-specific fatigue. The observed improvement in visuospatial working memory challenges simple fatigue-impairment assumptions. This ecologically valid protocol provides a foundation for future work on motor-cognitive interactions and injury-relevant performance in climbing athletes.
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.