MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083676001 · doi:10.35502/jcswb.443

Perceptions of seeking professional mental health support among public safety personnel: Understanding barriers and facilitators for police and firefighters

2025· article· en· W7083676001 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Safety and Well-Being · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiphtheria, Corynebacterium, and Tetanus
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPerceptionHelp-seekingPeer supportQualitative researchOccupational safety and healthCoping (psychology)Suicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public safety personnel (PSP), including police officers and firefighters, face significant risks of psychological issues due to exposure to traumatic events at work. Nevertheless, obstacles hinder seeking support. Understanding barriers and facilitators is crucial for tailoring interventions, to narrow the gap between need and action in seeking professional mental health support. The aim of this study is to provide a qualitative analysis of perceptions regarding seeking professional mental health support after being exposed to traumatic events at work in these two groups of PSP and identify potential differences between them. Based on 62 participants’ interviews (30 police officers and 32 firefighters), our findings informed us about current barriers to seek professional support as well as potential facilitators in police and firefighters’ organizations in the Quebec province of Canada. Six main themes were identified as barriers to seeking professional support among these PSP: opposing professional culture, accessibility issues, peer judgment, internalized stigma, prioritization of other coping strategies, and lack of self-awareness. Four main themes were identified that could facilitate the call for professional mental health support: organizational commitment, tailored resources, specific training, and peer-normalized attitudes. Some differences were found between the two occupational groups. Identifying barriers and proposing solutions assist organizations in supporting their employees’ mental health, while acknowledging potential differences between occupational groups that underscores the need for tailored support strategies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score0.885

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Community Safety and Well-BeingSame topicDiphtheria, Corynebacterium, and TetanusFrench-language works237,207