Symptoms and responses to critical incidents in paramedics who have experienced childhood abuse and neglect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mental and physical symptoms are common in paramedics, which may relate to high work stress, including critical incidents. As previous trauma is a risk factor for psychological symptoms after exposure to critical incidents, the prevalence of childhood experiences with abuse and neglect and paramedics' adaptation to critical incidents may be important. METHODS: 635 paramedics were surveyed regarding childhood experiences of physical, sexual or emotional abuse as well an index critical incident from the past, acute stress responses to that event and current mental and physical symptoms. A comparison group of 159 female hospital-based healthcare workers completed the same survey of childhood abuse and neglect in a separate study. RESULTS: 232 paramedics (36.5%) responded. Among these, physical, sexual or emotional childhood abuse was reported by 38.4%. Female paramedics reported significantly more emotional and physical abuse and neglect than female hospital workers. Paramedics who reported childhood abuse or neglect more frequently experienced signs of acute stress immediately following the index critical incident and for the following 2 weeks. Childhood abuse and neglect were associated with significantly higher scores for depressive symptoms, physical symptoms and burnout, and a higher prevalence of 'cases' scoring above thresholds of clinical significance. CONCLUSION: Childhood abuse may be more common in paramedics than in other healthcare workers, at least in women. Childhood abuse and neglect is associated with acute stress responses to critical incidents and to current physical and mental symptoms. These results are based on a low response rate and may not be generalisable.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".