MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408669353 · doi:10.35502/jcswb.422

“Cura te ipsum”: Healthy public safety leaders for healthy organizations

2025· article· en· W4408669353 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Rosemary Ricciardelli, Stan MacLellan, Alessandra Mazoza, Tom Stamatakis, Pierre Poirier, Taylor Sayers, Randy Mellow, Ken McMullen, Nadia Aleem, Leah Dunbar, Heidi Cramm

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Safety and Well-Being · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and ParksTrillium Health CentreQueen's UniversityRed Deer Regional HospitalMontreal Police ServiceRed Deer PolytechnicRegional Municipality of DurhamOttawa Public HealthCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceMedicinePublic relationsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our objective was to complete a systematic review on the mental health and wellness of public safety service leaders. We worked to refine a search strategy that would enable us to identify material about the mental health of public safety leaders; we were left with tens of thousands of potential articles for review, with virtually no evidence of relevant material. In response, we outline emergent patterns through our efforts to synthesize the literature, drawing attention to the dominant areas of leadership research: leaders supporting, creating, and being responsible for a culture of mental health for their workforce, without themselves being seen as part of that workforce – people who also require support. We highlight the limited international scholarship tied to public safety leadership styles, responsibilities, and mental health, then draw attention to leadership needs, particularly the need for more research on public safety leaders given their isolation and the complex, liability-laced, political, and personally difficult space they occupy. We recommend future research and targeted intervention to preserve and even improve leadership health. Our impetus remains in how leaders too need support to have their own unique health needs met if they are to lead efforts that preserve the wellness of members and the functioning of their organization. Thus, they require tailored interventions.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Community Safety and Well-BeingSame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207