Responding to the Heat and Planning for the Future: An Interview-Based Inquiry of People with Schizophrenia Who Experienced the 2021 Heat Dome in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People with schizophrenia have died at disproportionately higher rates during recent extreme heat events (EHEs) in Canada, including the deadly 2021 Heat Dome in British Columbia (B.C.). However, to date, little research has qualitatively focused on how people with schizophrenia experience and respond to EHEs. This study aimed to (i) explore how people with schizophrenia experienced and were impacted by the 2021 Heat Dome physically, cognitively, and emotionally and (ii) understand their level of awareness and health-protective actions taken in response to the EHE. Between October 2023 and February 2024, interviews were conducted with 35 people with schizophrenia who experienced the 2021 Heat Dome in a community setting within B.C., Canada. The semi-structured interviews were guided by pre-defined questions to explore the participant's background, living situation, social network, awareness and access to heat-mitigation measures. The transcripts were analyzed using a descriptive form of thematic analysis. Participants shared critical insights on how the EHE impacted them, including descriptions of mild to severe physical manifestations of heat stress (e.g., fainting, heat rashes), the triggering of schizophrenia-related symptoms (e.g., paranoia, hallucinations), and the detrimental effects on their energy levels and emotional stability, which further caused disruptions to their everyday life. Participants also illustrated gaps in knowledge and challenges experienced with accessing information, which hindered their ability to manage the heat exposure effectively and, for some, resulted in no actions (or counter-intuitive actions) being taken to mitigate the heat. These findings demonstrate the complex ways that individuals with schizophrenia experienced and responded to the 2021 Heat Dome and revealed various situational and contextual factors that further compounded the challenge of heat mitigation. These findings can support the development of tailored individual and community-level heat response and communication initiatives and strategies for people with schizophrenia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".