Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Disasters are unpredictable and frequently lead to chaotic post-disaster situations, creating numerous methodologic challenges for the study of the mental health consequences of disasters. In this commentary, we expand on some of the issues addressed by Kessler and colleagues, largely focusing on the particular challenges of (a) defining, finding, and sampling populations of interest after disasters and (b) designing studies in ways that maximize the potential for valid inference. We discuss these challenges - drawing on specific examples - and suggest potential approaches to each that may be helpful as a guide for future work. We further suggest research directions that may be most helpful in moving the field forward.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6879088 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mpr.267 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!