skip to main content

Title: Natural hazards and mental health among US Gulf Coast residents
Background: Individuals affected by disasters are at risk for adverse mental health sequelae. Individuals living in the US Gulf Coast have experienced many recent major disasters, but few studies have explored the cumulative burden of experiencing multiple disasters on mental health. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship between disaster burden and mental health. Methods: We used data from 9278 Gulf Long-term Follow-up Study participants who completed questionnaires on perceived stress, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in 2011-2013. We linked 2005-2010 county-level data from the Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States, a database of loss-causing events, to participant's home address. Exposure measures included total count of loss events as well as severity quantified as property/crop losses per capita from all hazards. We used multilevel modeling to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each exposure-outcome relationship. Results: Total count of loss events was positively associated with perceived stress (ORQ4:1.40, 95% CI:1.21-1.61) and was inversely associated with PTSD (ORQ4:0.66, 95% CI:0.45-0.96). Total duration of exposure was also associated with stress (ORQ4:1.16, 95% CI:1.01-1.33) but not with other outcomes. Severity based on cumulative fatalities/injuries was associated with anxiety (ORQ4:1.31, 95% CI:1.05-1.63) and more » stress (ORQ4:1.34, 95% CI:1.15-1.57), and severity based on cumulative property/crop losses was associated with anxiety (ORQ4:1.42, 95% CI:1.12-1.81), depression (ORQ4:1.22, 95% CI:0.95-1.57) and PTSD (ORQ4:1.99, 95% CI:1.44-2.76). Keywords: PTSD; disasters; mental health; natural hazards. « less
Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Award ID(s):
1828010
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10277385
Journal Name:
Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology
ISSN:
1559-0631
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. This research full paper presents screening rates for mental health issues and life-stress events in engineering-focused community college students during the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. Specifically, it attempts to answer the following research questions: 1) What is the overall rate of various mental health conditions among engineering-focused community college students, 2) What effects has the pandemic had on baseline stress levels engineering-focused community college, and 3) What effects has the pandemic had on quality of life, such as sleep habits and financial security of engineering- focused community college students? Data for this paper was collected via survey from May–July 2020 and includes responses from 84 students at 24 community colleges. The survey itself was a compilation of several widely- used instruments for measuring overall mental health and stress levels in a population. These instruments include the Kessler-6 for psychological distress, the PHQ for anxiety, depression, and eating disorders, the PC-PTSD for PTSD-like symptoms, and the SRRS for inventorying stressful life events. Among the major findings, 32% of respondents reported a major change in financial situation, 27% reported loss of employment, and 13% reported ceasing formal schooling because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, 32% of respondentsmore »reported that the COVID-19 pandemic worsened their housing security situation, 38% reported that COVID-19 has worsened their food security situation, and 36% report that COVID-19 has decreased their ability to access instruction, course materials, or course supplies. Finally, of respondents who completed at least one mental health screening instrument, 70% screened positive for at least one potentially diagnosable condition, while only 9% reported ever receiving a mental health diagnosis. Index Terms—Community College, Mental Health, Disability, Accessibility, Equity, Inclusion, Wellness« less
  2. Abstract

    Understanding the motivation to adopt personal household adaptation behaviors in the face of climate change-related hazards is essential for developing and implementing behaviorally realistic interventions that promote well-being and health. Escalating extreme weather events increase the number of those directly exposed and adversely impacted by climate change. But do people attribute these negative events to climate change? Such subjective attribution may be a cognitive process whereby the experience of negative climate-change-related events may increase risk perceptions and motivate people to act. Here we surveyed a representative sample of 1846 residents of Florida and Texas, many of whom had been repeatedly exposed to hurricanes on the Gulf Coast, facing the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season. We assessed prior hurricane negative personal experiences, climate-change-related subjective attribution (for hurricanes), risk appraisal (perceived probability and severity of a hurricane threat), hurricane adaptation appraisal (perceived efficacy of adaptation measures and self-efficacy to address the threat of hurricanes), and self-reported hurricane personal household adaptation. Our findings suggest that prior hurricane negative personal experiences and subjective attribution are associated with greater hurricane risk appraisal. Hurricane subjective attribution moderated the relationship between hurricane negative personal experiences and risk appraisal; in turn, negative hurricane personal experiences, hurricane risk appraisal,more »and adaptation appraisal were positively associated with self-reported hurricane personal adaptation behaviors. Subjective attribution may be associated with elevated perceived risk for specific climate hazards. Communications that help people understand the link between their negative personal experiences (e.g. hurricanes) and climate change may help guide risk perceptions and motivate protective actions, particularly in areas with repeated exposure to threats.

    « less
  3. Main effect models contend that perceived social support benefits mental health in the presence and the absence of stressful events, whereas stress-buffering models contend that perceived social support benefits mental health especially when individuals are facing stressful events. We tested these models of how perceived social support impacts mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic and evaluated whether characteristics of everyday social interactions statistically mediated this association – namely, (a) received support, the visible and deliberate assistance provided by others, and (b) pleasantness, the extent to which an interaction is positive, flows easily, and leads individuals to feel understood and validated. 591 United States adults completed a 3-week ecological momentary assessment protocol sampling characteristics of their everyday social interactions that was used to evaluate between-person average values and within-person daily fluctuations in everyday social interaction characteristics. Global measures of perceived social support and pandemic-related stressors were assessed at baseline. Psychiatric symptoms of depression and anxiety were assessed at baseline, at the end of each day of ecological momentary assessment, and at 3-week follow-up. Consistent with a main effect model, higher baseline perceived social support predicted decreases in psychiatric symptoms at 3-week follow-up (β = −.09, p = .001). Contrary to amore »stress-buffering model, we did not find an interaction of pandemic-stressors × perceived social support. The main effect of perceived social support on mental health was mediated by the pleasantness of everyday social interactions, but not by received support in everyday social interactions. We found evidence for both main effects and stress-buffering effects of within-person fluctuations in interaction pleasantness on daily changes in mental health. Results suggest the importance of everyday social interaction characteristics, especially their pleasantness, in linking perceived social support and mental health.

    « less
  4. Objective: This study addresses mental health concerns among university students, examining cumulative stress exposure as well as resilience resources. Participants: Participants were 253 first- and second-year undergraduate students (age = 18.76; 49.80% male, 69% students of color) enrolled at a large western US university. Methods: Data were obtained from a cross-sectional online survey examining marginalized statuses and multiple stressors alongside coping responses, adaptive self-concept, and social support as predictors of stress, anxiety, and depression. Results: Multivariate regressions demonstrated significant associations between stress exposures and lower levels of resilience resources with each mental health indicator (with substantial R2 of.49-.60). Although stressor exposures accounted for significant increases in mental health concerns, their exploratory power was attenuated by resilience resources (e.g., beta decreases from.25 to.16). Conclusions: Better understanding cumulative adversity/resilience resource profiles, particularly among marginalized students, can help universities in prioritizing institutional support responses toward prevention and mitigating psychological distress.
  5. OBJECTIVES Discrimination has been shown to have profound negative effects on mental and behavioral health and may influence these outcomes early in adulthood. We aimed to examine short-term, long-term, and cumulative associations between different types of interpersonal discrimination (eg, racism, sexism, ageism, and physical appearance discrimination) and mental health, substance use, and well-being for young adults in a longitudinal nationally representative US sample. METHODS We used data from 6 waves of the Transition to Adulthood Supplement (2007–2017, 1834 participants) of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. Outcome variables included self-reported health, drug use, binge drinking, mental illness diagnosis, Languishing and Flourishing score, and Kessler Psychological Distress Scale score. We used logistic regression with cluster-robust variance estimation to test cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between discrimination frequency (overall, cumulative, and by different reason) and outcomes, controlling for sociodemographics. RESULTS Increased discrimination frequency was associated with higher prevalence of languishing (relative risk [RR] 1.34 [95% CI 1.2–1.4]), psychological distress (RR 2.03 [95% CI 1.7–2.4]), mental illness diagnosis (RR 1.26 [95% CI 1.1–1.4]), drug use (RR 1.24 [95% CI 1.2–1.3]), and poor self-reported health (RR 1.26 [95% CI 1.1–1.4]) in the same wave. Associations persisted 2 to 6 years after exposure to discrimination. Similarmore »associations were found with cumulative high-frequency discrimination and with each discrimination subcategory in cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. CONCLUSIONS In this nationally representative longitudinal sample, current and past discrimination had pervasive adverse associations with mental health, substance use, and well-being in young adults.« less