Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35918120›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Exposure to risk and experiences of river flooding for people with disability and carers in rural Australia: a cross-sectional survey.

Jodie Bailie, Veronica Matthews, Ross Bailie, Michelle Villeneuve, Jo Longman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Extreme Weather, Vulnerable Populations, and Mental Health: The Timely Role of AI Interventions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Climate-Related Natural Disasters: Reflections on an Agenda for Rural Health Research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
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

5 authors.

Jodie BailieUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia jodie.bailie@sydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-4393-5773
Veronica MatthewsUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1319-257X
Ross BailieFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5966-3368
Michelle VilleneuveCentre for Disability Research and Policy, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jo LongmanUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn this paper, we explore the exposure to risk and experiences of people with disability and carers during a flooding event and the subsequent mental health impacts.

designA cross-sectional survey between September and November 2017. Binary logistic regression models were used to investigate associations between the mental health of people with disability and carers and their exposure to the flood. Inductive content analysis was used to analyse qualitative data.

settingFlood-affected communities in the rural area of Northern Rivers, New South Wales, Australia, 6 months after river flooding in 2017.

participantsPeople over 16 years and a resident in the Northern Rivers at the time of the flood were invited to participate. Using a purposive, snowballing sampling technique participants were drawn from a wide range of socioeconomic backgrounds and had experienced different degrees of flood exposure.

resultsOf 2252 respondents, there were 164 people with disability and 91 carers. Both groups had increased odds of having their home flooded (people with a disability: OR 2.41 95% CI 1.71 to 3.39; carers: OR 1.76 95% CI 1.10 to 2.84). On evacuation, respondents reported inaccessible, conflicting and confusing information regarding flood warnings. Essential services such as healthcare and social services were disrupted (people with a disability: OR 3.98 95% CI 2.82 to 5.60; carers 2.17 95% CI 1.33 to 3.54) and access to safe and mould free housing post flood event was limited. After taking sociodemographic factors into account, respondents with a disability and carers had greater odds of probable post-traumatic stress disorder compared with other respondents (people with a disability: 3.32 95% CI 2.22 to 4.96; carers: 1.87 95% CI 1.10 to 3.19).

conclusionOur findings show the profound impact and systemic neglect experienced by people with disability and carers during and after the 2017 flood event in the Northern Rivers. As people with disability will take longer to recover, they will require longer-term tailored supports and purposeful inclusion in flood preparedness and recovery efforts.

Indexed as

FloodsPersons with DisabilitiesAustraliaCaregiversCross-Sectional StudiesHumansRivershealth policymental healthpublic health

Identifiers

PMID35918120
PMCPMC9252212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.