Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 927

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Psychiatric Disorders Among Survivors of the Oklahoma City Bombing

North, Carol S.·1999·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Disasters expose unselected populations to traumatic events and can be used to study the mental health effects. The Oklahoma City, Okla, bombing is particularly significant for the study of mental health sequelae of trauma because its extreme magnitude and scope have been predicted to render profound psychiatric effects on survivors. OBJECTIVE: To measure the psychiatric impact of the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on survivors of the direct blast, specifically examining rates of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), diagnostic comorbidity, functional impairment, and predictors of postdisaster psychopathology. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Of 255 eligible adult survivors selected from a confidential registry, 182 (71%) were assessed systematically by interviews approximately 6 months after the disaster, between August and December 1995. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnosis of 8 psychiatric disorders, demographic data, level of functioning, treatment, exposure to the event, involvement of family and friends, and physical injuries, as ascertained by the Diagnostic Interview Schedule/Disaster Supplement. RESULTS: Forty-five percent of the subjects had a postdisaster psychiatric disorder and 34.3% had PTSD. Predictors included disaster exposure, female sex (for any postdisaster diagnosis, 55% vs 34% for men; chi2 = 8.27; P=.004), and predisaster psychiatric disorder (for PTSD, 45% vs 26% for those without predisaster disorder; chi2 = 6.86; P=.009). Onset of PTSD was swift, with 76% reporting same-day onset. The relatively uncommon avoidance and numbing symptoms virtually dictated the diagnosis of PTSD (94% meeting avoidance and numbing criteria had full PTSD diagnosis) and were further associated with psychiatric comorbidity, functional impairment, and treatment received. Intrusive reexperience and hyperarousal symptoms were nearly universal, but by themselves were generally unassociated with other psychopathology or impairment in functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that a focus on avoidance and numbing symptoms could have provided an effective screening procedure for PTSD and could have identified most psychiatric cases early in the acute postdisaster period. Psychiatric comorbidity further identified those with functional disability and treatment need. The nearly universal yet distressing intrusive reexperience and hyperarousal symptoms in the majority of nonpsychiatrically ill persons may be addressed by nonmedical interventions of reassurance and support.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.282.8.755

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 927

Metadata

Authors
North, C. S.
Venue
JAMA
Published
1999-08-25
Volume
282
Issue
8
Pages
755
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2002937549
Cited by
927
References
2
FWCI
40.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Psychiatric Disorders Among Survivors of the Oklahoma City Bombing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.282.8.755
The paper
North, C. S. (1999). Psychiatric Disorders Among Survivors of the Oklahoma City Bombing. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.8.755

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.