MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391311381 · doi:10.3390/fire7020039

Quality of Life Measured with the WHO-5 Wellness Index during Wildfire Season in Two Canadian Provinces—Cross-Sectional Study

2024· article· en· W4391311381 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueFire · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersQEII FoundationAlberta Health Services
KeywordsIndex (typography)Cross-sectional studyGeographyQuality (philosophy)Environmental healthEnvironmental scienceStatisticsMedicineMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Wildfires impact large populations worldwide with increasing frequency and severity. In Canada, the fire season has affected more areas this year with potential implications for individuals’ well-being and quality of life (QoL). Objective: This study aimed to explore data related to the well-being and QoL of individuals living in areas impacted by wildfires in two Canadian provinces. Methodology: A cross-sectional survey was used to collect data from the residents in the two provinces who subscribed to the Text4Hope mental health support service. Descriptive and inferential statistics were applied using World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5). Results: Out of 1802 Text4Hope subscribers, 298 responded to the baseline surveys, yielding a response rate of (16.5%). The mean score of QoL was (40.8/100 ± 20.7). Most respondents were from Alberta (84.2%), 40 years old or below (28.3%), females (85.2%), Caucasian (83.5%), in a relationship (56.4%), employed (63.6%), received diagnoses of depression (56.6%), and anxiety (52.9%).The overall prevalence of low QoL was (67.3%; 95% CI: 61.2–73.1%) that was mostly reported among subscribers who were from Nova Scotia (70.5%), 40 years old or younger (71.2%), other gender (83.3%), Black/Hispanic and other ethnicity (85.7% each), having high-school or less education (70.3%), not in a relationship (74.1%), and unemployed (73.6%). In terms of clinical factors, low QoL was most prevalent among those who received the diagnoses of depression (74%) and anxiety (74.3%), and those who have been receiving antidepressants (71.8%) or benzodiazepines (93.3%). Regarding wildfire-related factors, the highest prevalence of low QoL was reported among those living in a region that has recently been impacted by the wildfires (74.7%) and those who have been less frequently watching television images about the devastation caused by the recent wildfires (72.6%). The multivariate logistic regression analysis model predicting the low QoL including the various variables was statistically significant; Χ2 (df = 19; n = 254) = 31.69, p = 0.03. It was found that living in a region impacted by wildfires (37.9%) was the only significant predictor of low QoL (adjusted OR: 1.96; 95% CI: 1.05–3.65). Conclusions: The impact of wildfire on the QoL and well-being among people living in impacted regions is significant. It is empirical for the health authorities to support those who are disadvantaged by wildfire via running of screening programs to early identify mental health symptoms and addressing the living conditions of the survivors, along with the provision of innovative means of mental health support. This necessitates enhanced planning of the governments and health authorities to overcome such adverse psychological consequences of these events.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.334 · 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