MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944534520 · doi:10.1177/2333721419846191

Seniors Who Experienced the Lac-Mégantic Train Derailment Tragedy: What Are the Consequences on Physical and Mental Health?

2019· article· en· W2944534520 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Danielle Maltais, Anne-Julie Tremblay, Óscar Labra, Geneviève Fortin, Mélissa Généreux, Mathieu Roy, Anne-Lise Lansard

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology and Geriatric Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-TémiscamingueUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDerailmentTragedy (event)Mental healthGerontologyPopulationDowntownMedicineEnvironmental healthPsychologyPsychiatryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: In July 2013, a train derailment caused the death of 47 people and destroyed the downtown area in the city of Lac-Mégantic (Quebec, Canada). This tragedy had several impacts on this small community. Method: Three years after this disaster, we used a representative population-based survey conducted among 800 adults (including 265 seniors aged 65 or above) to assess the physical and mental health of seniors. Results: Several differences were observed in seniors’ physical and mental health based on their level of exposure to the tragedy. Nearly half of seniors highly exposed to the train derailment (41.7%) believe that their health has deteriorated in the past 3 years. The majority of seniors highly exposed to the train derailment (68.7%) also show symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorders. Seniors highly or moderately exposed to the tragedy were also more likely to have found positive changes in their personal and social life as compared with nonexposed seniors. Discussion: A technological disaster such as a train derailment still had negative impacts on seniors’ physical and mental health 3 years later. Conclusion: Public health authorities must tailor prevention and promotion programs to restore health and well-being in this population.

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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerontology and Geriatric MedicineSame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207