Assessing the Relative Impact of Diverse Stressors among Canadian Coast Guard and Conservation and Protection Officers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Public Safety Personnel (PSP), including members of the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) and Conservation and Protection (C&P) officers, are regularly exposed to potentially psychologically traumatic events (PPTEs) and other occupational stressors (organizational and operational stressors). The current study quantified occupational stressors among CCG and C&P and assessed relationships with PPTEs and mental health disorders. Participants (n = 341; 58.4% male) completed an online survey assessing self-reported occupational stressors, PPTEs, and mental health disorder symptoms. CCG and C&P Officers reported significantly lower mean overall and item-level organizational and operational stress scores compared to other Canadian PSP. Mean operational stress scores were statistically significantly associated with increased odds of screening positive for all mental disorders and organizational stress scores were statistically significantly associated with increased odds of screening positive for all mental disorders except social anxiety disorder. Participants reported several item-level occupational stressors associated with screening positive for posttraumatic stress disorder, general anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and alcohol use disorder, even after accounting for diverse PPTE exposures. Exposure to PPTEs may be a regular part of employment for CCG and C&P PSP; however, bureaucratic red tape, staff shortages, excessive administrative duties, physical conditioning, healthy eating, and fatigue are occupational stressors that appear significantly related to mental health. Ongoing mental health efforts are needed to mitigate and manage the impact of occupational stressors among CCG and C&P.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".