Mental Health and Social Networks After Disaster

Bryant, Richard A.; Gallagher, H. Colin; Gibbs, Lisa; Pattison, Philippa; MacDougall, Colin; Harms, Louise; Block, Karen; Baker, Elyse; Sinnott, Vikki; Ireton, Greg; Richardson, John F.; Forbes, David; Lusher, Dean

doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2016.15111403

Cited by 100 publications

(91 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Those who received support only from formal sources, not from personal connections, reported lowest post‐disaster satisfaction with life.3. Bryant et al () Assessed the extent to which mental health outcomes after the disaster were associated with social network structures. (Same sample as 12)Event: Black Saturday bushfires, February 2009 Country: Australia Age: adults (mean=57.1) Sample size: 558 Sampling: non‐random Diversity: 57 per cent female; other factors unspecifiedDesign: cross‐sectional Time: between two and four years after Support measures: social embeddedness aspects of social networks were assessed by asking respondents to nominate people with whom they felt personally close. A social network map was constructed that showed participants’ ties to other participants (method‐based)More close ties was associated with less depression and less risk of PTSD ( direct effect ).…”

Section: Annexesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of post‐disaster social support investigations conducted after disasters that struck the Australia and Oceania continent

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This scoping review provides a summary of research findings on social support dynamics in the wake of disasters that occurred on the continent of Australia and Oceania between 1983 and 2013. Forty‐one studies, quantitative and qualitative, were summarised, investigating different facets of post‐disaster supportive interactions. All inquiries assessed disasters resulting from natural hazards, with the majority of them conducted following events in Australia and New Zealand. The review revealed similar patterns of post‐disaster social support dynamics that routinely unfold after disastrous incidents all over the world. Consistent with the disaster mental health literature, the documentation of social support mobilisation and social support deterioration processes was common. Salutary direct effects of supportive behaviours on post‐disaster psychological distress were also highly evident. Most studies, however, posed research questions or hypotheses that lacked empirical or theoretical grounding. In conclusion, the review offers several recommendations on how to advance research on post‐disaster social support.

show abstract

Section: Annexesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of post‐disaster social support investigations conducted after disasters that struck the Australia and Oceania continent

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As is evident from the description above, the investigators' primary interest in the broader Beyond Bushfires study was exploring the influence that social networks and social environments had on the recovery trajectories of individuals and communities and we designed our survey instruments to capture these phenomena. As hypothesized, we found that people's networks, level of social connectedness, and group involvement did have an impact on their mental health (Bryant et al, 2017;Gallagher et al, 2019). The qualitative component of the study however, consistent with commonly accepted inductive qualitative research paradigms, was explicitly designed (using open-ended research probes) to be driven more by the interests of the participants than those of the researchers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 64%

The role of the natural environment in disaster recovery: “We live here because we love the bush”

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This mixed-methods study explored the role of connection to the natural environment in recovery from the 'Black Saturday' bushfires that blazed across Victoria, Australia, in February 2009. Qualitative findings demonstrated that many participants had a strong connection to the natural environment, experienced considerable grief as a result of its devastation in the fires and drew solace from seeing it regenerate over the following months and years. Quantitative analyses indicated that a strong attachment to the environment was associated with reduced psychological distress, fewer symptoms of major depression and fire-related PTSD, and higher levels of resilience, post-traumatic growth and life satisfaction. While social connections are increasingly recognized as supportive of disaster recovery, the influence of landscapes also needs to be recognized in terms of the impact of their destruction as well as their therapeutic potential.

show abstract

“…This scale was with a total of 10 items and marked with 5 points, among which items 4, 5, 7 and 8 were reversely scored. The results of PSS-10 are as follows: mild (0-14), moderate (15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25), moderately severe (26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31) and severe (32-40) stress. In order to lter severe cases, the cutoff scores for GAD-7, PHQ-9 and PSS-10 were 5, 5 and 15 respectively, which predicts detecting symptoms of anxiety, depression and stress if scores were higher than this criteria.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Though COVID-19 has been eased effectively in China, there are still individuals stricken with serious mental disorders [33]. Individuals suffering from severe mental trauma have a high hazard to develop PTSD [34], but an earlier study showed that psychological interventions are bene cial to reduce anxiety and depression during disasters, and is good for them to develop personal strategies for coping with crisis [28].…”

Section: Intervention Strategies Of Mental Health For Social Agenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…COVID-19 as an uncertain and severe public health crisis, would crush individuals physically and psychologically. Scholars has approved that effective mental interventions may reduce one's anxiety and depression symptoms during disasters[28].Consequently, interventions such as psychological counseling should be carried out to promote mental health condition during the epidemic.4.1.1 Anxiety Symptoms among People with Different IdentitiesAnxiety symptom of Level 1, Level 2 and Level 4 population present a descending gradient array. As for Level 3 population, there is a big difference on anxiety symptom and depression symptom from other groups, some of which are approximately the same with that of Level 1 and Level 2 population, while some of which are quite similar to that of Level 4 population, suggesting that anxiety and depression symptom of Level 3 population is indistinguishable from other…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Internet Investigation of Mental Health Status of 1144 Different Status Identities in South China during Outbreak of COVID-19

Luo¹,

Deng²,

Wu³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background At the end of 2019, the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with highly infectious, transmits rapidly. So it has caused people panic to a certain degree. Methods This cross-sectional study performed via an online survey run from January 30 to March 30, 2020. 1144 people in South China (287 of level 1 population, 121 of level 2 population, 160 of level 3 population, 576 of level 4 population ) were investigated. GAD-7 scale, PHQ-9 scale, and PSS-10 scale were used to evaluate the mental health status of different populations. Results Among 1144 subjects, the average GAD-7 score was 4(1,8), the average PHQ-9 score was 4(1,9), and the average PSS-10 score was 16(11,19). There were statistically significant differences in the scores of GAD-7 (H = 15.235, P <0.01), PHQ-9 (H = 9.265, P = 0.026), and PSS-10 (H = 8.435, P = 0.049) among different levels of population. In the score of GAD-7: The anxiety degree of the level 1 population is higher than that of the level 2 population and the level 4 population. The difference between the two pairs is statistically significant (Z = -2.932, -4.012, -2.949, P <0.005). There are significant differences in items of“becoming easily annoyed or irritable”, "seemingly terrible things will happen"(Z = -3.399 ~ -2.055, P <0.005); Score of PHQ-9: The depression degree of the level 1 population and the level 2 population is higher than that of the level 4 population, and the difference between the two pairs is statistically significant (Z = -3.38, -2.682, P <0.005). There are significant differences in items of "difficult to fall asleep or not awake", "feeling depressed" and other related items (Z = -2.885 ~ -2.003, P <0.005); Score of PSS-10: The stress degree of the level 3 population is higher than that of the level 1 population and the level 4 population (Z = -3.693 ~ -2.702, P <0.005). There are significant differences in items of "feel confident", "life are as expected", "the ability to control anger", "the things are all under control" and other related items (Z = -4.782 ~ -2.102, P <0.005). Conclusion There are differences in the effects of COVID-19 on the mental health of people with different identities. Appropriate psychological interventions should be provided for different populations in combination with their mental health status.

show abstract

Mental Health and Social Networks After Disaster

Cited by 100 publications

References 57 publications

A scoping review of post‐disaster social support investigations conducted after disasters that struck the Australia and Oceania continent

A scoping review of post‐disaster social support investigations conducted after disasters that struck the Australia and Oceania continent

The role of the natural environment in disaster recovery: “We live here because we love the bush”

An Internet Investigation of Mental Health Status of 1144 Different Status Identities in South China during Outbreak of COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About