MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404604443 · doi:10.1177/21568693241290307

Local Social Capital, Disaster Housing Damage, and Mental Health: Insights from Hurricane Harvey

2024· article· en· W4404604443 on OpenAlexaff
Ethan J. Raker, Kevin T. Smiley

Bibliographic record

VenueSociety and Mental Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthSocial capitalReceiptPsychologySocial determinants of healthPsychological resilienceMental distressSocial supportSocial connectednessGerontologyPsychiatryEconomic growthSocial psychologyHealth carePolitical scienceMedicineBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community-level social capital has been theorized to shape mental health, particularly in disaster contexts, but methodological complexities hamper prior studies. Pairing zip-code-level data on social capital from Opportunity Insights with repeated cross-sectional health survey data before and after Hurricane Harvey in Houston, Texas, we examine how local social capital moderated the mental health consequences of disaster housing damage. We first document null associations between local social capital and residents’ mental health before the disaster. Next, we fit models predicting psychological distress and poor mental health days, revealing that local levels of economic connectedness and rates of volunteering offset adverse mental health effects of home damage after the storm and patterned disaster assistance receipt. These findings have broader implications for literatures on community resilience, mental health, and disaster recovery.

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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.304 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociety and Mental HealthSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207