MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135764554

Predicting and explaining improvement in work and social adjustment in clients attending police service psychological therapies

2025· article· en· W7135764554 on OpenAlexaff
Byron; id_orcid 0000-0002-8121-3520 Graham, Maurice Mulvenna, Raymond Bond, Anne Moorhead, Norry McBride

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Portal (Queen's University Belfast) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthSet (abstract data type)Test (biology)Social workWork (physics)Mental health serviceService (business)Occupational safety and health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Police officers face traumatic experiences such as violence, verbal abuse, exposure to accidents and crime scenes. This can lead to mental health conditions which extend into retirement as well as impacting the officers’ immediate family, resulting in the potential for impairment in work and social adjustment. Some police services therefore offer psychological mental health services to retired and retiring officers and their families. This study focuses on analysing data from the digital administrative system of a psychological therapies service offered to police officers and their families in Northern Ireland. The aim was to explore the mental health and demographic factors that predict changes in work and social adjustment through attending the service. Whilst past studies have focused on the factors related to mental health issues in police officers, fewer studies have focused on retired police officers and their families. Additionally, few studies have focused on impairment in work and social adjustment in retired and retiring police officers and their families. To address these knowledge gaps, machine learning approaches were applied alongside traditional statistical techniques to predict changes in the clients score on the work and social adjustment scale. Data were from the services administrative system, with a total of 636 observations included in the study, split into a training set (80%) and test set (20%). Ten fold cross validation, repeated five times, was used to tune the model parameters of common machine learning algorithms including decision trees, gradient boosted machines, and random forests. Interpretable machine learning techniques were applied to gain additional insight, including partial dependence plots and permutation variable importance. Descriptive statistics indicated that clients attending the service have an average age of 51 years, with 70% male, and 54% married. The most frequent condition categories include ‘combination’ (59%), ‘other’ (19%), and ‘psychological trauma’ (17%), with frequent subcategories including Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (37%) and Anxiety Disorder (17%). Clients have an average presenting score on the work and social adjustment scale of 21 (scale range 0 – 40). Results show a statistically significant (p<0.05) improvement in work and social adjustment during attendance at the service, with an average reduction in impairment of 10 points. More complex machine learning algorithms were most accurate in modelling the determinants of work and social adjustment, with gradient boosting resulting in the most accurate predictions on the test dataset (RMSE 7.63, R-Squared 0.42). Important predictors of improvement include baseline characteristics, completion of the full episode of care, episode length, and the client’s motivation. These relationships are further explored using techniques from interpretable machine learning, including partial dependence plots, highlighting more complex non-linear relationships. The findings have important scientific and practical implications. The results reveal important determinants of improvement in work and social adjustment. The results also highlight the potential benefit from the application of machine learning approaches alongside traditional statistical techniques in analysing psychological therapy data. This can provide useful insights into service delivery and evaluation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Portal (Queen's University Belfast)Same topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207