Identifying the Key Risk Factors for Adverse Psychological Outcomes Among Police Officers: A Systematic Literature Review
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
It is well established that police work is highly stressful; however, a paucity of evidence limits our knowledge and understanding of the factors that may lead to, compromise, and/or compound psychological distress for this unique population. To address this lack, the current systematic review was conducted to reveal the individual, organizational, and operational risk factors that have been identified in the research literature to date and their associations with depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and burnout. We performed searches on literature published between January 2008 and January 2018 and identified a total of 20 studies that met our inclusion criteria. The results indicated that individual factors, including high levels of neuroticism, low social support, and engaging in passive or avoidant coping strategies, were associated with adverse psychological outcomes. This review identified low social support from colleagues as the most common risk factor linked to adverse psychological outcomes. Other organizational risk factors associated with such outcomes included high work demands, low resources, and low reward. This article demonstrates that individual, organizational, and operational factors all impact the negative psychological outcomes of police officers to some degree. In particular, the current review suggests that certain negative psychological outcomes are likely a result of a combination of risk factors across the three domains of risk, highlighting the necessity to observe psychological risk of police in a more comprehensive way.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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