MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294125818 · doi:10.3390/ijerph19159759

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, and Wildfires: A Fifth-Year Postdisaster Evaluation among Residents of Fort McMurray

2022· article· en· W4294125818 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Wanying Mao, Medard Kofi Adu, Ejemai Eboreime, Reham Shalaby, Nnamdi Nkire, Belinda Agyapong, Hannah Pazderka, Gloria Obuobi-Donkor, Ernest Owusu, Folajinmi Oluwasina, Yanbo Zhang, Vincent I. O. Agyapong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityHealth Sciences CentreHealth Research FoundationUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Mental Health AssociationMental Health Foundation
KeywordsSuicide preventionPoison controlMajor depressive disorderInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsOccupational safety and healthPsychologyPsychiatryPosttraumatic stressTraumatic stressAcute Stress DisorderClinical psychologyMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Over 90,000 residents had to be evacuated from Fort McMurray (FMM), Alberta, Canada due to the wildfire that engulfed the city in May 2016. Overall, about 2400 homes or 10% of the housing stock in Fort McMurray were destroyed. The fire consumed about 200,000 hectors of forest, reaching into Saskatchewan. During major disasters, communities’ infrastructure is disrupted, and psychological, economic, and environmental effects are felt for years afterwards. Objective: Five years after the wildfire disaster, this study assessed the prevalence rate of major depressive disorder (MDD) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in Fort McMurray residents and determined the demographic, clinical, and other risk factors of probable MDD and PTSD. Methodology: A quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted to collect data through an online questionnaire administered via REDCap between 24 April and 2 June 2021. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) was used to assess the presence of MDD symptoms in respondents. The PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-C) was used to assess likely PTSD in respondents. Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate regression analyses were employed. Results: 186 out of 249 individuals who accessed the survey link completed it (74.7% response rate). The median age of the subscribers was 42. The sample included a majority of 159 (85.5%) females; 98 (52.7%) > 40 years of age; 175 (94.1%) employed; and 132 (71%) in a relationship. The overall prevalence of MDD symptoms in our study sample was 45.0% (76). Four variables independently predicted MDD symptoms in the multivariate logistic regression model, including: unemployed (OR = 12.39; 95% CI: 1.21−126.37), have received a mental diagnosis of MDD (OR = 4.50; 95% CI: 1.57−12.92), taking sedative-hypnotics (OR = 5.27; 95% CI: 1.01−27.39), and willingness to receive mental health counseling (OR = 4.90; 95% CI: 1.95−12.31). The prevalence of likely PTSD among our respondents was 39.6% (65). Three independent variables: received a mental health depression diagnosis from a health professional (OR = 4.49; 95% CI: 1.40−14.44), would like to receive mental health counseling (OR = 4.36, 95% CI: 1.54−12.34), and have only limited or no support from family (OR = 11.01, 95% CI: 1.92−63.20) contributed significantly to the model for predicting likely PTSD among respondents while controlling the other factors in the regression model. Conclusions: According to this study, unemployment, taking sleeping pills, having a prior depression diagnosis, and the willingness to receive mental health counseling significantly increase the odds of having MDD and PTSD following wildfires. Family support may protect against the development of these conditions.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.344 · 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.

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

Citations31
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207