MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413245910 · doi:10.3138/jmvfh-2024-0090

Evaluating Road to Mental Readiness wellness checks for CAF search and rescue technicians

2025· article· en· W4413245910 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Valerie M. Wood, Suzanne Bailey, Kimberly Guest

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Military Veteran and Family Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Armed ForcesDepartment of National Defence
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPerceptionPsychologyStigma (botany)Resilience (materials science)Applied psychologyPsychological resilienceMedical educationMedicineSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The Road to Mental Readiness (R2MR) program delivers mental health training, which includes a guided discussion and wellness check for Canadian Armed Forces search and rescue technicians (SAR techs) during their annual dive proficiency and currency training to support their mental health and performance and helps to decrease barriers to care and encourage care seeking when necessary. A mixed-methods evaluation of SAR techs' perceptions of the wellness checks was conducted in July 2024. Methods: Sixty SAR techs completed an anonymous survey three months post-training to capture their perceptions of the wellness checks, including their usefulness; common therapeutic factors identified as important mediators of wellness check effectiveness from previous research; and attitudes toward care-seeking, supporting others, stigma, and resilience. Results: Most SAR techs found their most recent wellness check to be at least a little helpful in supporting their mental health and well-being, and their attitudes toward the wellness check appeared to improve afterward. The learning of new skills was a common therapeutic factor that most related to perceptions of wellness check usefulness. In terms of related outcomes, those who rated the wellness check as more useful reported greater confidence in accessing mental health care, but not greater resilience or stigma. Finally, most SAR techs who received a follow-up recommendation followed through with it. Discussion: The findings indicate that SAR techs perceive the current R2MR training as useful for supporting their mental health and well-being, but the findings are limited to this unique occupation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Military Veteran and Family HealthSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207