Finding the Balance: Uncovering Resilience in the Veterinary Literature
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resilience is an issue of emerging importance in veterinary education and research, as in other professional contexts. The aim of this study was to perform an appraisal of how resilience is portrayed in the contemporary (1995-present) research and education literature around veterinary mental health, and to attempt a provisional synthesis informing a conception of resilience in the veterinary context. Qualitative analysis of the literature (59 sources included) revealed a dominant emphasis on mental health problems, particularly stress, which outweighs and potentially obscures complementary approaches to well-being and resilience. We found the construct of resilience underdeveloped in the veterinary literature and in need of further research, but provide a preliminary synthesis of key themes emerging from the current literature (emotional competence, motivation, personal resources, social support, organizational culture, life balance, and well-being strategies). We advocate for greater balance between complementary perspectives in veterinary mental health education and research, and propose that an increasing focus on resilience (here endorsed as a dynamic and multi-dimensional process involving personal and contextual resources, strategies, and outcomes) will help to address this balance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it