MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903353408 · doi:10.35502/jcswb.62

Experiences of trauma, depression, anxiety, and stress in western-Canadian HEMS personnel

2018· article· en· W2903353408 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sebastian Harenberg, Michelle McCarron, R. Nicholas Carleton, Thomas P. O'Malley, Terry Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Safety and Well-Being · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaSaskatchewan Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyMental healthPsychiatryDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyMedicineChecklistPopulationFirst responderPsychologyMedical emergencyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mental health in first responders and other public safety personnel has received substantial research attention in the past decade. Emergency medical services (EMS) demonstrate a heightened prevalence of maladaptive mental health concerns compared to other first responders (e.g., police, fire fighters). Interestingly, there is an absence of research examining helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) personnel, who respond to what are often life-threatening cases in chal­lenging circumstances. Hence, the purpose of the present study was to assess the experiences of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and associated mental health conditions (i.e., depression, anxiety, stress) in HEMS workers. HEMS work­ers from a single mid-western Canadian organization (n = 100) participated in the study. The participants completed the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL-5) and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) as part of an online survey. The results revealed that five per cent of HEMS personnel experienced heightened PTSD symptoms. Few participants exhibited signs of mild to severe depression, anxiety, and stress (< 17%). HEMS personnel experienced fewer mental health concerns than other first responder groups as reported in the literature; indeed, these figures are similar to levels observed within the general population. These findings may be explained by organizational or personality charac­teristics. Underreporting of mental health concerns may be an alternate explanation. Future qualitative and quantitative research is needed to explain and replicate the results of the present study.

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)0.002
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Community Safety and Well-BeingSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207