MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3151434025 · doi:10.1002/1348-9585.12219

Health outcomes of psychosocial stress within firefighters: A systematic review of the research landscape

2021· review· en· W3151434025 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational Health · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialStressorCINAHLMental healthPsychological interventionBurnoutPsychologyMedicineClinical psychologySocial supportGerontologyPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Much of the research surrounding firefighter health has concerned the hazards intuitively associated with the occupation, such as physical, thermal, and chemical risks. However, an additional aspect of their work environment, psychosocial stressors, has begun to attract a growing level of attention. Work-related psychosocial stress may best be described as mental and emotional strain caused by a combination of workplace events and characteristics, and the objective of our review was to identify the health outcomes associated with these stressors in firefighters. METHODS: A systematic review was performed of studies reporting on the psychosocial stressors and the associated health outcomes experienced by firefighters. Data sources included the MEDLINE, PsychInfo, and CINAHL databases. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Upon analysis, we found that firefighters experienced a range of psychosocial stressors (including interpersonal conflict and concerns over organizational fairness) and observed that these stressors were associated with a number of health-related outcomes that could be arranged into six areas: depression-suicidality, non-depressive mental health problems, burnout, alcohol use disorders, sleep quality, and physiological parameters and somatic disorders. CONCLUSION: Our findings strongly suggest that work-related psychosocial stressors can affect the health and well-being of those in the fire service, and highlight that interventions meant to address these psychosocial risk factors should focus upon promoting self-esteem, enhancing self-efficacy, and strengthening social support.

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 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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.382
GPT teacher head0.633
Teacher spread0.251 · 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