MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112891045 · doi:10.1177/0706743720979920

Mental Health Risks after Repeated Exposure to Multiple Stressful Events during Ongoing Social Unrest and Pandemic in Hong Kong: The Role of Rumination: Risques pour la santé mentale après une exposition répétée à de multiples événements stressants d’agitation sociale durable et de pandémie à Hong Kong: le rôle de la rumination

2020· article· en· W3112891045 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stephanie Ming Yin Wong, Christy Lai Ming Hui, Corine Sau Man Wong, Yi Nam Suen, Sherry Kit Wa Chan, Edwin Lee, Wing Chung Chang, Eric Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRuminationMental healthClinical psychologyPsychologyStressorAngerDepression (economics)PopulationMedicinePsychiatryEnvironmental healthCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The co-occurrence of different classes of population-level stressors, such as social unrest and public health crises, is common in contemporary societies. Yet, few studies explored their combined mental health impact. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of repeated exposure to social unrest-related traumatic events (TEs), coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic-related events (PEs), and stressful life events (SLEs) on post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depressive symptoms, and the potential mediating role of event-based rumination (rumination of TEs-related anger, injustice, guilt, and insecurity) between TEs and PTSD symptoms. Methods: Community members in Hong Kong who had utilized a screening tool for PTSD and depressive symptoms were invited to complete a survey on exposure to stressful events and event-based rumination. Results: A total of 10,110 individuals completed the survey. Hierarchical regression analysis showed that rumination, TEs, and SLEs were among the significant predictors for PTSD symptoms (all P < 0.001), accounting for 32% of the variance. For depression, rumination, SLEs, and PEs were among the significant predictors (all P < 0.001), explaining 24.9% of the variance. Two-way analysis of variance of different recent and prior TEs showed significant dose-effect relationships. The effect of recent TEs on PTSD symptoms was potentiated by prior TEs ( P = 0.005). COVID-19 PEs and prior TEs additively contributed to PTSD symptoms, with no significant interaction ( P = 0.94). Meanwhile, recent TEs were also potentiated by SLEs ( P = 0.002). The effects of TEs on PTSD symptoms were mediated by rumination (β = 0.38, standard error = 0.01, 95% confidence interval: 0.36 to 0.41), with 40.4% of the total effect explained. All 4 rumination subtypes were significant mediators. Conclusions: Prior and ongoing TEs, PEs, and SLEs cumulatively exacerbated PTSD and depressive symptoms. The role of event-based rumination and their interventions should be prioritized for future research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207