Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29200546›Full record

ArticlePopulation and environment2017

Post-Disaster Fertility: Hurricane Katrina and the Changing Racial Composition of New Orleans.

Nathan Seltzer, Jenna Nobles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Population and environment, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Journaling During a Disaster: Challenges and Opportunities for Data Collection.Disaster medicine and public health preparedness · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nathan SeltzerUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison.
Jenna NoblesUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Center for Demography and EcologyR24HD047873 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI RAYMO, JAMES M · 2004 to 2013
$7.2M
Scientific and Technical CoreP2CHD047873 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Katherine J. Curtis · 2014 to 2026
$5.1M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD047873NICHD NIH HHS R24 HD047873
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large-scale climate events can have enduring effects on population size and composition. Natural disasters affect population fertility through multiple mechanisms, including displacement, demand for children, and reproductive care access. Fertility effects, in turn, influence the size and composition of new birth cohorts, extending the reach of climate events across generations. We study these processes in New Orleans during the decade spanning Hurricane Katrina. We combine census data, ACS data, and vital statistics data to describe fertility in New Orleans and seven comparison cities. Following Katrina, displacement contributed to a 30% decline in birth cohort size. Black fertility fell, and remained 4% below expected values through 2010. By contrast, white fertility increased by 5%. The largest share of births now occurs to white women. These fertility differences-beyond migration-driven population change-generate additional pressure on the renewal of New Orleans as a city in which the black population is substantially smaller in the disaster's wake.

Identifiers

PMID29200546
PMCPMC5703431
OpenAlexW2602901973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.