UNIVERSITY RESEARCH: Comparing the Mechanism of Injury Between Elite and Recreational Rock Climbers.

Hello my names Rosie and I am currently in my 4th year of University, I about to start collecting data for my dissertation using an online survey.

If you have suffered from a rock climbing related injury within in the past 12 months your participation in this study would be greatly appreciated, the survey takes roughly 10 minutes to complete. 

This study is recruiting climbers of all ages and abilities. 

https://abertay.fra1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_5nnCLt23y2fMxTg

In the survey: "for the purpose of this study a recreational climber is someone who climbs 1-3 times a week, at grades no higher than 6b. An elite rock climber is someone who climbs 4+ times a week, at grades 6b+ and above consistently"

I would rethink these categorizations. For example, there are plenty of people that climb harder than 6b+ who don't climb 4x a week, and 6b+ is hardly an "elite" climbing grade.

How will you verify that the data collected is true?

Will the study be shared with everyone when completed and will access to the study be free after it is finished, including the data?

For those interested, here is a study that pays you to get high

December 8, 2021

Researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder are currently recruiting men and women who regularly exercise while high on cannabis to study the potential benefits of the practice. People who apply must live in the Boulder, Colorado area and be familiar with mixing cannabis and running workouts. Men who apply must be between 21 and 40, and women must be between 21 and 50.

The researchers will pay up to $100 to each recruit who completes the study, a callout on the university’s website says.

Yeah, 6b+ is .11a. Barely weekend chuffer level. 

Congrats guys, we're elite climbers

Brian Monettiwrote:

For example, there are plenty of people that climb harder than 6b+ who don't climb 4x a week, and 6b+ is hardly an "elite" climbing grade.

That's probably the point. They need more than half a dozen climbers in the elite category (who have been injured, who fill out the form, who...). I suspect they chose a cutoff to get the statistical power they need, not cause they think you're awesome for climbing 7a. 

Frank Steinwrote:

Yeah, 6b+ is .11a. Barely weekend chuffer level. 

OP is from the UK and likely meant mid 5.12 range, and not the french scale

Adam blocwrote:

OP is from the UK and likely meant mid 5.12 range, and not the french scale

Okay, so completely incomprehensible grades. Makes way more sense now. 

For those off the island

Done, happy to be called "Elite" for climbing 11s. 

What is "indirect contact" with the ground?

PRRosewrote:

What is "indirect contact" with the ground?

"Indirect contact with object" was right before "indirect contact with the ground" question. Scary how bad some research actually is.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If anyone wants to see other research on climbing:

The International Rock Climbing Research Association (IRCRA): https://www.ircra.rocks/

Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=rock+climbing+research&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart

Academia.edu: https://www.academia.edu/Documents/in/Rock_Climbing

NIH: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?linkname=pubmed_pubmed&from_uid=33652414

Beta Angle: https://beta-angel.com/research/research-inventory/2018-research-summaries/

Human Kinetics: https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/ijspp/16/9/article-p1242.xml

U of Utah: https://campusguides.lib.utah.edu/c.php?g=856488&p=6169570

Mountain Research Init: https://www.mountainresearchinitiative.org/

Thinking Mountains conference: http://www.thinkingmountains.ca/index.html

Too much research is behind a paywall but some is free.

The people who come on MP and ask for my help with their study should get honest feedback. If they don't want honest feedback, they don't belong on MP. If my comments trouble you or them, that's great. Gets the researcher's attention if nothing else.

None is here to make sure you, or they, have a safe space from the opinions of others. This researcher isn't a child in need of your hand holding. Poor research preparation is on display here. That is bad.

All the evidence points to undergrads carrying their poor habits into their professional careers. Feedback is always good. Poor research is not. The reason so much crappy research gets published is because too few examine it.

If you dislike critical comments about poorly thought out research studies, you need to get over yourself and your triggered hypocrisy about comments that offend your sensibilities.

And too much research is behind a paywall. It is too much to ask if this study will be too? 

Nothing brings out the the MAGA voters and Proud Boy sympathizers  - likely to be  > 50% of MP users - like someone posting about a research study.

Teton Climberwrote:

"Indirect contact with object" was right before "indirect contact with the ground" question. Scary how bad some research actually is.

Bro. She's an undergrad. Stop being a dick. 

(Also, most research is freely available on sci hub. Get the doi you want, copy it there.)

Teton Climberwrote:

"Indirect contact with object" was right before "indirect contact with the ground" question. Scary how bad some research actually is.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Probably most undergraduate research is not professional quality, but it's being done for pedagogical reasons so lighten up. 

I want to know what the researcher is thinking with respect to that question so I can answer it accurately.

WF WF51wrote:

Nothing brings out the the MAGA voters and Proud Boy sympathizers  - likely to be  > 50% of MP users - like someone posting about a research study.

Wow. Usually I'm called a Communist.

PRRosewrote:

What is "indirect contact" with the ground?

“Indirect contact” is the “smoked but didn’t inhale” of climbers, right? 

Brian Monettiwrote:

“Indirect contact” is the “smoked but didn’t inhale” of climbers, right? 

"Light deck" if you will