Cited by 28Digital Mental Health InterventionsMental Health Treatment and AccessTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Access, Use and Completion of a Brief Disaster Mental Health Intervention among Hispanics, African-Americans and Whites Affected by Hurricane Ike

Open access
Price, Matthew, Davidson, Tatiana M, Andrews, Jeannette O, Ruggiero, Kenneth J·2013·Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare

Abstract

African-Americans and Hispanics are disproportionally affected by disasters. We evaluated differences in the use and completion of a web-based mental health intervention, Disaster Recovery Web (DRW), by White, African-American and Hispanic adults in the aftermath of Hurricane Ike. Approximately one year after the hurricane, a telephone survey was carried out with adults from Galveston and Chambers counties. A total of 1249 adults participated in the survey (80% White, 14% African-American and 6% Hispanic). Mental health and mental health service utilization were assessed. Whites were more likely to have previously used the Internet to obtain general health information than African-Americans or Hispanics (P < 0.001). A logistic regression was used to identify differences in the use of the Internet intervention after controlling for covariates. There were no differences in rates of non-use and dropout attrition between Whites, African-Americans and Hispanics. Thus the findings suggest that web-based mental health interventions can be used to reach African-American, Hispanic and White adults at similar rates after a disaster.

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 · 10.1177/1357633x13476230

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A pre-post-test study without a control group conducted after Hurricane Ike in Texas with N = 1249 adult survivors found no significant reduction in depressive symptoms or PTSD symptoms 4 months post-intervention.

    “A pre–post-test study without a control group conducted after Hurricane Ike in Texas with N = 1249 adult survivors [27] found no significant reduction in depressive symptoms or PTSD symptoms 4-months post-intervention.”

    From Promoting Recovery from Disasters, Pandemics, and Trauma: A Systematic Review of Brief Psychological Interventions to Reduce Distress in Adults, Children, and Adolescents (2023) · cites this paper as [27]

    The Methods (Participants and Procedures; page not provided) report 1,249 adult survey participants after Hurricane Ike and a four-month interval between baseline and follow-up interviews. The Results report differences in intervention use and completion, not pre–post changes in depression or PTSD. Thus the cited paper does not support the claim that symptoms showed no significant reduction. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The long-term effectiveness of some interventions cannot be assessed because ten completed studies on these interventions did not report follow-up measurements.

    “Furthermore, the long-term effectiveness of some interventions cannot be assessed because ten completed studies on these interventions did not report follow-up measurements [21,27,35,36,37,40,41,47,53,57].”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [3]Hawkins AO Zinzow HM Amstadter AB Danielson CK Ruggiero KJ Marginalized populations. Mental health consquences of disasters 2009 Cambridge Cambridge University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Price, M., Davidson, T. M., Andrews, J. O., & Ruggiero, K. J.
Affiliations
Medical University of South Carolina (US)
Corresponding author
Andrews, Jeannette O
Venue
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare
Published
2013-02
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
70-74
ISSN
  • 1357-633X (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-1109
OpenAlex
W2087091053
Cited by
28
References
13
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4
FWCI
4.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P60MH082598, R01MH081056, R34MH077149, T32MH018869)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR029882)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
Hurricane Ike, disaster mental health, racial and ethnic disparities, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, White adults, intervention completion, attrition, mental health service utilization, disaster recovery, Galveston
MeSH terms
Adult, Black or African American, Disasters, Ethnicity, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Male, Mental Health Services, Middle Aged, United States, Logistic Models, Internet, White People, Cyclonic Storms

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