Material hardship is associated with posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms among low‐income Black women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The link between socioeconomic status and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms is well established. Given that Black women are disproportionately burdened by both poverty and PTSD symptoms, research focusing on these constructs among this population is needed. The current study assessed the association between material hardship (i.e., difficulty meeting basic needs) and PTSD symptoms among 227 low-income Black women in the United States. We explored several potential explanations for the association between poverty and PTSD symptoms (e.g., individuals living in poverty may experience higher levels of trauma exposure; individuals living in poverty may have less access to relevant protective resources, like social support; poverty itself may represent a traumatic stressor). Using robust negative binomial regression, a positive association between material hardship and PTSD symptoms emerged, B = 0.10, p = .009, SMD = 0.08. When trauma exposure was added to the model, it was positively associated with PTSD symptoms, B = 0.18, p < .001, SMD = 0.16, and material hardship remained positively associated with PTSD symptoms, B = 0.10, p =.019, SMD = 0.08. When social support indicators were added to the model, they were not associated with PTSD symptoms; however, material hardship remained significantly associated, B = 0.10, p = .021, SMD = 0.08. In the model with material hardship and trauma exposure, a significant interaction between material hardship and trauma exposure on PTSD symptoms emerged, B = -0.04, p = .027. These results demonstrate the importance of including material hardship in trauma research, assessment, and treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".