The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Study: protocol for a prospective investigation of mental health risk and resilience factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), like all public safety personnel (PSP), are frequently exposed to potentially psychologically traumatic events that contribute to posttraumatic stress injuries (PTSI). Addressing PTSI is impeded by the limited available research. In this protocol paper, we describe the RCMP Study, part of the concerted efforts by the RCMP to reduce PTSI by improving access to evidence-based assessments, treatments and training as well as participant recruitment and RCMP Study developments to date. The RCMP Study has been designed to (1) develop, deploy and assess the impact of a system for ongoing annual, monthly and daily evidence-based assessments; (2) evaluate associations between demographic variables and PTSI; (3) longitudinally assess individual differences associated with PTSI; (4) augment the RCMP Cadet Training Program with skills to proactively mitigate PTSI; and (5) assess the impact of the augmented training condition (ATC) versus the standard training condition (STC). Participants in the STC (n = 480) and ATC (n = 480) are assessed before and after training and annually for 5 years on their deployment date; they also complete brief monthly and daily surveys. The RCMP Study results are expected to benefit the mental health of all participants, RCMP and PSP by reducing PTSI among all who serve.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".