ArticleOccupational medicine (Oxford, England)2026
Scoping review of UK female-firefighters, physical fitness and occupational performance.
Article in Occupational medicine (Oxford, England), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFirefighting is a physically demanding occupation with sex-neutral minimum physiological performance requirements. Whilst 9% of UK firefighters are female, there has been no systematic review of scientific literature concerning their role-specific physiology and performance.
aimsTo summarise UK-based literature concerning female firefighters within four key areas: physical demands of operational tasks, testing and training, injuries, and influence of female-specific physiology on training task performance and injury.
methodsThis systematic scoping review adopted the 5-step framework for conducting scoping reviews from Arksey and O'Malley [34], alongside The SPIDER tool to identify and summarise peer-reviewed data for female UK firefighters.
resultsFour papers were identified, including 31 females. Hose running imposed the highest physical demand on females (44.0 ml·kg-1·min-1). Mean maximal aerobic capacity values were 44.4 ± 5.5 ml·kg-1·min-1 (directly measured) and 46.9 ± 6.7 ml·kg-1·min-1 (estimated), assuming normal distribution, approximately 35% of the population would not meet the threshold of 42.3 ml·kg-1·min-1. Mean Firefighter Simulation Performance of females was 7.4 seconds slower than the passing requirements. No published data were available involving fitness interventions, injuries or female-specific considerations.
conclusionsThere is a paucity of UK-based research exploring the assessment, maintenance and development of physical fitness and occupational performance in female firefighters. Further research is needed to expand the current evidence-base relating to the occupational demands of female firefighters and physical fitness testing to inform policies by using a more representative evidence-base. Additionally, this work highlighted the absence of published research related to fitness training, injury surveillance and female-specific considerations.
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.