Implementation of body worn cameras:Rapid review of current research and practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report provides a review of recent research and literature on the implementation and use of body worn cameras (BWCs) to address the issues of occupational violence (OV) and workplace health and safety (WHS) among frontline emergency service workers in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. <br/>The extensive review of the literature and current research found that while there has been much written about the role out and implementation of BWCs in policing, there has been significantly less focus on paramedics or ambulance services. <br/>Research and evaluations that have been undertaken in policing or ambulance services have tended to be internal reviews, with very few independent, external studies, and even fewer peer review processes. <br/>Studies in policing have focussed on a broad range of factors including Integrity and community trust, complaints handling, use of force/violence by police officers, crime levels, evidence for criminal trials and streamlining procedural justice. However there has been limited focus on the impact of BWC on OV towards officers or WHS including physical, mental, and emotional wellbeing.
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.
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 | 0.044 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 it