MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Individual Predictors of Traumatic Reactions in Firefighters

2000· article· en· W2064129036 on OpenAlexaff
Cheryl Regehr, John W. Hill, Graham Glancy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPsychological resilienceDistressClinical psychologyAlienationStressorFeelingInterpersonal communicationLocus of controlSocial supportVulnerability (computing)Depression (economics)Intervention (counseling)Developmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasingly, theorists and researchers in the area of trauma are pointing to the importance of individual differences in resilience and vulnerability as key determinants of the intensity and duration of trauma-related symptoms. Determining the relative influence of individual predictors is important for the further development of theoretical models for understanding trauma responses and for the subsequent development of intervention strategies that are sensitive to individual differences. This study explores the influence of individual factors and social support on traumatic reactions in firefighters exposed to tragic events in the line of duty. A total of 164 Australian firefighters completed questionnaires targeting locus of control, self-efficacy, patterns of interpersonal relating, social support and level of emotional distress. Results indicate that individuals with feelings of insecurity, lack of personal control, and alienation from others were more likely to experience higher levels of depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms subsequent to exposure to traumatic events on the job.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations198
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental DiseaseSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207