MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2048811268 · doi:10.1037/a0034464

Bridging the gap: Workplace mental health research in Canada.

2013· article· en· W2048811268 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Jennifer K. Dimoff, E. Kevin Kelloway

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueWorkplace Health and Well-being
Établissements canadiensSaint Mary's University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPsychologyMental healthBridging (networking)Applied psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatryClinical psychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Over the past few decades, poor employee mental health has become one of Canada's most prevalent and costly occupational health issues. The recently released Canadian National Standard on Psychological Health and Safety is helping to broaden the corporate perspective of mental health and provide organisations with more systematic workplace mental health guidelines. We suggest that it is theoretically and practically important for researchers to continue to pursue the following four areas of occupational mental health research: 1) the development of theory; 2) the standardization of strategy development and evaluation; 3) the improvement of longitudinal research; 4) and the application of workplace mental health strategies in natural workplace settings.Keywords: employee mental health, occupational health, workplace strategiesAs the largest contributor to the disease burden in middle-and high-income countries (World Health Organization [WHO], 2004), mental health problems are significantly impacting billions of people throughout the world (Collins et al., 2011). In Canada alone, approximately 6.7 million people-nearly one fifth of the country's population-are currently living with a mental health problem (Smetanin et al., 2011). Unfortunately, as mental health problems continue to become more prevalent, so do their associated costs. In 2011, it was estimated that the Canadian economy loses approximately $50 billion every single year as a result of mental health problems, and that over the next 30 years, the total jcost to the Canadian economy will likely amount to well over $2.5 ' trillion (Smetanin et al., 2011).Because of these substantial financial losses, government and corporate interest in the mental health of Canadians is rising (Mental Health Commission of Canada [MHCC], 2012). Given that Canadian organisations collectively lose upward of $6 billion annually as a result of productivity declines associated with poor employee mental health (Smetanin et al., 2011), more and more organisational leaders are attempting to invest in the mental health of their employees (MHCC, 2012). With the cumulative 30-year productivity impact expected to be nearly $198 billion (Smetanin et al., 2011), the burden of poor employee mental health is likely to impede the overall growth of the Canadian economy-a consequence that has the potential to affect all Canadians. Because of these significant costs for Canadian organisations and members of the general public, systematic workplace research is still needed to better understand how organisations can prevent, manage, and help treat common employee mental health problems, such as excessive stress, burnout, depression, anxiety, and substance abuse problems.Efforts to improve knowledge about mental health and mental health problems have been relatively infrequent, especially compared with efforts designed to improve knowledge about physical health problems (Jorm, 2000). As a result, many employers and employees tend to have a relatively limited understanding of mental health (Jorm, 2000; WHO, 2000). Unsurprisingly, mental health literacy-one's knowledge, beliefs, and understanding about mental health problems and treatments-is remarkably low throughout the world, especially when compared with the worldwide level of physical health literacy (Jorm, 2000). In fact, mental health literacy is so low that many people with mental health problems suffer from substantial human rights violations, such as discrimination and social stigma (WHO, 2003), which often go unnoticed and unaddressed. As contended by the World Health Organization (2000), although employers have no problem recognising and accommodating an employee with a physical health problem, such as a broken arm or cancer, many employers are either hesitant or unaware of the appropriate responses and accommodations for an employee with a mental health problem.The Impact of Poor Employee Mental Health on the WorkplaceMany Canadian companies experience some of the negative organisational and employee-level consequences associated with poor employee mental health (Dunnagan, Peterson, & Haynes, 2001) . …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies, Intégrité de la recherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,399
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0020,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,153
Tête enseignante GPT0,452
Écart entre enseignants0,299 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations31
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienneMême sujetWorkplace Health and Well-beingTravaux en français237 207