Risk and Protective Factors for Mental Health and Community Cohesion After the 2013 Calgary Flood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine mental health and community cohesion in women living in Calgary after a natural disaster considering previously collected mental health data. METHODS: Data from an ongoing longitudinal cohort, the All Our Families study, were used to examine mental health and community cohesion 5 months after a major flood in Calgary, Canada. Participants who had completed a baseline questionnaire before the flood were eligible for inclusion in this study (N=923). Four multivariable logistic regression models were built to examine predictors of post-traumatic stress, depression, anxiety, and community cohesion. RESULTS: Elevated anxiety before the flood was associated with 2.49 (95% CI: 1.17, 5.26) increased odds of experiencing high levels of post-traumatic stress, regardless of whether respondents lived in a flood-risk community or not. Women who experienced damage to property, or who provided help to others, were more likely to perceive an increased sense of community cohesion (adjusted ods ratio (AOR): 1.67; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.54 and AOR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.13, 2.52, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Women with underlying mental health conditions may be more vulnerable to the psychological impacts of a natural disaster regardless of their level of exposure. Natural disasters may bring communities together, especially those who were more tangibly impacted. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:470-477).
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".