MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053256883 · doi:10.1097/yco.0b013e328305e4c1

Suicidality among police

2008· review· en· W2053256883 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Psychiatry · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical emergencyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper reviews recent international literature on suicide among police officers. RECENT FINDINGS: Research examining the incidence and prevalence of suicide and suicidality among police, particularly the extent to which they constitute a high-risk group, has produced conflicting results. Police appear to be at greater risk of posttraumatic stress reactions (resulting from higher exposures to trauma) and job burnout (resulting from the way in which police work is organized), both of which increase the risk of psychosocial problems and suicide. SUMMARY: Though worker suicide is the result of a complex interaction of personal vulnerabilities, workplace stressors, and environmental factors, research into police suicide has largely emphasized only two of these components: workplace trauma as a determinant of posttraumatic stress reactions; and organizational stressors as a determinant of job stress and burnout. Personality factors and coping styles have received less attention and there have been few attempts to understand the complex interactions between all of these factors. Prevention strategies have focused on psychological debriefing for traumatic incidents and organizational change designed to improve job commitment and reduce job burnout.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.229
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it