A personal history of trauma and experience of secondary traumatic stress, vicarious trauma, and burnout in mental health workers: A systematic literature review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Secondary traumatic stress (STS), vicarious trauma (VT), and burnout (BO) are work-related outcomes commonly ascribed to mental health workers, given their exposure to clients' traumatic experiences. It is theorized that a worker's own history of trauma increases the occurrence of these outcomes, through retraumatization/activation of threat cues during client interactions and overinvolvement with a client's progress. Given the inconsistencies in the literature and the ubiquity of trauma among workers, a systematic review was conducted to examine the association of personal trauma and the 3 related, but separate, work outcomes. METHOD: A systematic search strategy was used across relevant research databases (Cochrane, JSTOR, PsycINFO, PubMed) for empirical studies conducted from 2000-2021. In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, a four-phase selection process was used, resulting in 39 studies identified meeting the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A clear (positive) association between personal trauma history and STS and VT were identified, whereas mostly null findings were observed in regard to BO. The majority of studies were conducted in Western countries, adopted questionnaires as the primary means of data collection, and all but one were cross-sectional in design. CONCLUSION: In addition to a lack of diversity in study design, there were conceptual limitations to the research conducted (e.g., treating victims as a unitary group, neglecting the inclusion of mechanisms). To assist in moving the field forward, five research recommendations are outlined with the goal of creating greater clarity in the work-outcomes literature and increased nuance in how personal trauma is understood. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".