Prevalence rates PTSD

Prevalence

• proportion of a population that has a psychological disorder at a specific point in time

• differences in prevalence rates can help identify which groups of populations are at risk of developing a certain disorder

PTSD

• mental disorder triggered by experiencing or witnessing a traumatic event

• symptoms include - affective (emotion), behavioural (repetitive), cognitive (disruptions to memory/learning), somatic (physical symptoms)

• Classification is called DSM 5 criteria (survey) which discusses symptoms of PTSD

Socioeconomic status

• people living in a lower socioeconomic area are more suseptable to social risk factors like violence and a lack of resources which can contribute to PTSD symptoms

• lower status = increased likelihood of developing PTSD (increase prevalence of PTSD)

Critical thinking of prevalence rates intro

• diagnosis is not consistent across cultures

• identifying disparities in prevalence rates can improve accuracy

• temporal changes

Garrison et al aim

• to determine the cross cultural differences of PTSD symptoms after Hurricane Andrew in florida

Garrison et al method

• 350 black, hispanic, and white teenager sample

• structured interviews 6 months after event, asked about their experience with the disaster, emotional responses, and any stressful experiences

• interviews scripts were analysed by different researchers who did not see the pps

Garrison et al results

• 9 % of females and 3% of males developed diagnosis of PTSD

• 8.3% of black and 6.1% of hispanic pp showed signs of PTSD due to their inability to cope with the damages

Garrison et al conclusion

• in conclusion, women and minorities are more likely to develop PTSD after traumatic event because they are more prone to having socioeconomic issues due to historical, structural and social factors

Garrison et al link back

• minorities who may have lacked the financial resources to cope with the damages

• influence their cognitive appraisal negatively in which they may feel that they cannot overcome their struggle

• negative appraisal can influence their top-down processing that may enhance their sense of threat making them more susceptable to developing PTSD

Garrison et al eval

• high ecological validity as pp had experienced real life natural disaster

• limited sample of only teenage pp who may have diff views on socioeconomic status and diff cognitive appraisals compared to younger/older pp

• correlational results where it is assumed that minorities suffer from low socioeconomic status despite that not being seen as a measure, could be other extraneous variables that led to PTSD - limits internal validity

Luby et al aim

• investigated the effects of poverty on brain development in early childhood

Luby et al method

• 145 right handed children recruited from large sample of 10 year longitudinal preschool depression study

• cognitively and socially assessed yearly for 3 to 6 years

• support or hostility of primary caregiver was also noted

• presence of stressful life experiences was also noted

• MRI scans measured brain volumes of white and grey matter and volumes of hippocampus + amygdala

luby et al results

• poverty was associated with less white and grey matter in brain and with smaller hippocampus and amygdala volumes

• if caregiver was supportive or hostile mediated effects of poverty on both hippocampi

• stressful life events affected volume of left hippocampus only

luby et al conclusion

• in conclusion, poverty experienced in early childhood impacted brain development because the amygdala and hippocampus of children in poverty had smaller volumes

luby et al link back

• poverty can increase parental stress, making caregivers more hostile towards children which is a risk factor for PTSD

• hippocampus regulates emotions so a smaller hippocampus would mean less regulation of emotions which could increase the likelihood of PTSD

• thus, a more hostile caregiver due to poverty (Socioeconomic factor) could cause a smaller hippocampus which reduces emotional regulation which increases likelihood of PTSD (increase prevalence rates)

luby eval

• while the study sample was large, it was taken from depression study database so children likely already had depression which could have affected brain volume and affected the generalizability of the findings

• could be some bidirectional ambiguity as unsure if the poverty causes the brain volume changes or if caregiver response causes the brain volume changes which reduces internal validity

• study was 6 year longitudinal which increases the credibility of the results and allows the researchers to examine long term effects of poverty

prevalence rates eval

• diagnosis of disorders are not consistent across cultures, the studies mentioned etic approach which doesn’t account for how symptoms may be diff in other cultures for the same disorder

• different symptoms for the same disorder can affect the accuracy of prevalence rates as they may not be accounted for

• by identifying disparities in prevalence rates, we can improve areas with better education, educate about self-efficacy and provide resources to help and prevent PTSD development

• temporal changes could affect prevalence rates like social media increasing potential for mental disorders

Informed consent - luby

• as children are minors, parents or guardians gave informed consent on their behalf

• as study spanned over 10 yrs, pp regularly reminded of their right to withdraw

anonymity and confidentiality - garrison

• the interviews were recorded and a script was analysed instead of the actual recording which meant pp maintained their anonymity as the researchers analysing didn’t know what they looked like/their names/ or their voices

• researcher only knew their race as that was relevant to the study

informed consent

• participants agreeing to participate in a study + have been given enough info to make an informed decision

• can reduce stress and discomfort from pp because they will know what to expect

• gives pp a chance to not participate, which is relevant if there are any negative effects from participating in the study

maintain anonymity & confidentiality

• removing participants names from data

• can avoid the invasion of pp privacy and saves participants from possible embarrassment from being in the study

eval informed consent

• Informed consent may lead to demand characteristics

• Often consent is gained, but rewards are also given for taking part in the study (class credit, money, therapy) which could mean the participants have no motivation to actually take part

• getting participants to give their consent before taking part is a positive ethical point

eval of anonymity & confidentiality

• increases trust and honesty as when pp are assured their info will remain anonymous then they may be more inclined to be honest

• inability to follow up after results as pp names will not be included past the data collection phase

• difficult to anonymize interviews fully as they often discuss very personal issues which could be hard to neutralise without contaminating the results