These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Self-reported ability assessment in rock climbing.
    Author: Draper N, Dickson T, Blackwell G, Fryer S, Priestley S, Winter D, Ellis G.
    Journal: J Sports Sci; 2011 May; 29(8):851-8. PubMed ID: 21491325.
    Abstract:
    Level of ability within rock climbing is generally expressed in terms of a "best ascent", rated using various grading systems within the sport. The most common method of obtaining this information is via self-report. The aim of this study was to examine the validity of self-reported climbing grades. Twenty-nine competitive rock climbers (17 males, 12 females) were first asked to report their current (defined as within the last 12 months) best on-sight lead ascent grade (Aus/NZ). The participants then climbed a specifically designed indoor route, under on-sight conditions (one attempt, no route practice or preview), to obtain an assessed grade. The route increased in difficulty, and was such that the distance achieved by the climber corresponded to a particular grade. The mean (±standard deviation) self-reported and assessed grade was 22.6 ± 3.4 and 22.0 ± 3.0 (Aus/NZ) respectively. Despite slight over- and underestimations in males and females respectively, there was no statistically significant difference between self-reported and assessed on-sight climbing grades. The results of this study suggest that self-reported climbing grades provide a valid and accurate reflection of climbing ability.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]