MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385670235 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2023.2013

Mental Health Impacts of Wildfire, Flooding and COVID-19: on educators: A Comparative Study

2023· article· en· W4385670235 on OpenAlexaffabout
Belinda Agyapong, Ejemai Eboreime, Reham Shalaby, Hannah Pazderka, Gloria Obuobi-Donkor, Michael O. Adu, Wenjun Mao, Folajinmi Oluwasina, Eric Owusu, Andrew J. Greenshaw, Vincent I. O. Agyapong

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthDescriptive statisticsMajor depressive disorderGeneralized anxiety disorderCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineDepression (economics)AnxietyPandemicDemographyOccupational safety and healthPsychologyPsychiatryMoodStatisticsDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Fort McMurray, a city in northern Alberta, Canada, has experienced multiple traumas in the last five years, including the 2016 wildfire, the 2020 floods, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Eighteen months after the wildfire, major depressive disorder (MDD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms were elevated among school board employees in the city. Objectives This study aimed to compare employees of the school board and other employees of Fort McMurray in respect to the impact the 2016 wildfires, the 2019 COVID pandemic, and the 2020 floods had on their mental health. Methods A quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted in Fort McMurray from 24 April to 2 June 2021. Online questionnaires were administered through REDCap and were designed to capture socio-demographic characteristics, clinical as well as wildfire, COVID-19, and flooding-related variables. Mental health outcome variables were captured using self-reported standardized assessment scales. Data were analysed with descriptive statistics, Chi-square/Fisher’s Exact tests, and binary regression analysis. Results Of the 249 residents who accessed the online survey, 186 completed the survey, giving a response rate of 74.7%. Of these respondents, 93.5% (174) indicated their employment status and were included in the Chi-square analysis. Most of the respondents were female (86.2%, (150)), above 40 years (53.4%, (93)), and were in a relationship (71.3%, (124)). The prevalence values for MDD, GAD and PTSD among respondents were 42.4%, 41.0, and 36.8%, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between employees of the school board and other employees with respect to likely PTSD prevalence (28% vs. 45%, respectively, p < 0.05), although with other factors controlled for, in a binary logistic regression model, employer type did not significantly predict likely PTSD. Conclusions The study has established that likely PTSD symptoms were significantly higher in other employees compared to those of school board employees. Greater exposure to the traumatic events and a greater perceived lack of support from other employers might have contributed to the significantly higher prevalence of PTSD in other employees Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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 score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.377 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207