PREVALENCE AND PREDICTORS OF POSTTRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER, DEPRESSION, AND ANXIETY IN PERSONNEL WORKING IN EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT SETTINGS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Professionals working in the emergency department (ED) are regularly exposed to traumatic events. Rates of posttraumatic mental health conditions vary widely in the literature and there is no agreement that rates in ED staff are elevated relative to other populations. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review of international literature reporting prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and anxiety in ED personnel to determine whether prevalence is elevated compared to the general community, and to evaluate convergent evidence across the literature for predictive factors. To our knowledge, there is no comprehensive review on this topic in the literature at this time. METHODS: Seven databases were searched for studies reporting rates of PTSD, depression, and anxiety in ED personnel. Two independent researchers screened studies and assessed quality using Munn's Prevalence Critical Appraisal Instrument. Best-evidence synthesis determined whether conditions demonstrated elevated prevalence compared to the general population of Canada, a conservative benchmark. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies from 12 countries and a combined sample size of 4768 were included. PTSD rates ranged from 0% to 23.6% (mean 10.47%), depression ranged from 0.7% to 77.1% (mean 24.8%), and anxiety rates ranged from 2.4% to 14.6% (mean 9.29%). Each condition was elevated compared to the general population. Sociodemographic variables were not consistent predictors. Elevated PTSD seemed most strongly related to workplace exposure and maladaptive coping. CONCLUSIONS: ED professionals have an elevated risk of experiencing PTSD, depression, and anxiety. Identification of organizational and workplace predictors are needed to inform interventions that will reduce risk and provide optimal treatment and management of PTSD, depression, and anxiety in ED settings.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".