MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810520147 · doi:10.1037/ocp0000126

With a little help from my boss: The impact of workplace mental health training on leader behaviors and employee resource utilization.

2018· article· en· W2810520147 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer K. Dimoff, E. Kevin Kelloway

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational Health Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMental healthPsycINFOPsychologyPromotion (chess)BossHealth promotionResource (disambiguation)NursingApplied psychologyMEDLINEMedicinePublic healthPsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

= 37; 56.92% response rate) communication about mental health and mental health resources. Based on other-report data from employees, leaders who received training shared more information about mental health and mental health resources, were more supportive of employees' mental health issues, and actively encouraged employees to use available resources. Employees whose leaders attended the training also reported increased willingness to seek out and use available resources. For leaders who attend training and complete three waves of data collection, results suggest that a 3-hr mental health training may lead to significant behavioral change up to 3 months posttraining. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Citations162
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational Health PsychologySame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207