MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2771431288

The sleep behaviour and fatigue trends of wildland firefighters during non-fire and fire deployments

2017· dissertation· en· W2771431288 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zachary McGillis

Bibliographic record

VenueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSleep (system call)PsychologyAeronauticsForensic engineeringMedicineEngineeringComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ontario wildland firefighting is a hazardous and safety-critical operation with relatively high injury rates. This is indicated by the 10-year average of 4.46 lost-time injuries per 100 workers in Ontario wildland firefighting compared to 0.95-1.88 lost-time injuries in other occupations, as reported by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB). There is anecdotal evidence that fatigue is a major contributor to injury; however, evidence to support this is limited. Understanding fatigue trends, potential causes, and areas for intervention within the wildland firefighting profession were the main goals of the study.
\nAccordingly, contributors to fatigue were assessed during non-fire and fire deployments by collecting objective sleep (Actigraphy) and vigilance (Psychomotor Vigilance Test) measures, as well as subjective measures of fatigue and recovery (questionnaires). Data were collected from wildland firefighters during the high-risk months of the fire season within the province of Ontario.
\nSleep duration less than six hours, sleep efficiency below 85%, and wake after sleep onset greater than 30 min were more frequently observed during high intensity, Initial Attack deployments. Sleep duration less than six hours were routinely observed in non-fire work periods, placing workers at risk of pre-deployment sleep-debt. Self-reported morning fatigue scores were low-to-moderate and were best predicted by Initial Attack deployment work conducted the day prior. Reaction times were slightly worse in morning periods during Initial Attack deployments, but scores were generally within acceptable ranges. Self-reported recovery scores were generally good regardless of work performed.
\nThe current study highlights suboptimal sleep behaviours during both non-fire and fire suppression work, with sleep measures below recommended standards. High-intensity fire suppression periods (i.e. Initial Attacks) were predictably associated with the worst sleep and fatigue levels; but it is worth noting that the data were collected during a record low-hazard, firefighting season and may not reflect the sleep behaviours and fatigue levels encountered during a high-hazard fire season. Interventions for sleep/fatigue hygiene and awareness should be explored and are further discussed in this paper. The research methodology employed in the current study could be used in future investigations to determine the sleep behaviours and fatigue levels of wildland firefighters during a high hazard fire season.

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University)Same topicOccupational Health and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207