Psychological and physical health of the July 1996 [Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean region flood] disaster victims: a comparative study between victims and non-victims
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In July 1996, the Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean region suffered one of the greatest natural disasters in Quebec's history. This article presents results of a study aiming at comparing, two years after the flood, the physical and psychological health condition of victims (n=177) to that of non-victims (n=168). The results indicate that victims, - regardless of their gender - present a psychological well-being as well as a post-disaster physical health that is different from non-victims. Disaster victims are much more numerous than non-victims in considering that their health is bad or average and in witnessing new health problems or the exacerbation of existing problems. Victims also present more manifestations of prosttraumatic stress and somatic complaints, have higher levels of depression, anxiety and social dysfunction than non-victims. However, no significant difference between subjects was revealed concerning severe depression. Results obtained corroborated that of other studies. Aftera natural or technological disaster involving important material damages to individual belongings, victims are more affected than non-victims concerning their psychological and physical health. Language: fr
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".