4.2 Article

Race, psychosocial vulnerability and social support differences in inner-city women's symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder

期刊

ANXIETY STRESS AND COPING
卷 32, 期 1, 页码 18-31

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10615806.2018.1532078

关键词

Race; women; life stress; posttraumatic stress disorder; social support

资金

  1. NIDA NIH HHS [R01 DA039522] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Objectives: Inner-city Black women may be more susceptible to posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) than White women, although mechanisms underlying this association are unclear. Living in urban neighborhoods distinguished by higher chronic stress may contribute to racial differences in women's cognitive, affective, and social vulnerabilities, leading to greater trauma-related distress including PTSD. Yet social support could buffer the negative effects of psychosocial vulnerabilities on women's health. Methods/Design: Mediation and moderated mediation models were tested with 371 inner-city women, including psychosocial vulnerability (i.e., catastrophizing, anger, social undermining) mediating the pathway between race and PTSD, and social support moderating psychosocial vulnerability and PTSD. Results: Despite comparable rates of trauma, Black women reported higher vulnerability and PTSD symptoms, and lower support compared to White Hispanic and non-Hispanic women. Psychosocial vulnerability mediated the pathway between race and PTSD, and social support moderated vulnerability, reducing negative effects on PTSD. When examining associations by race, the moderation effect remained significant for Black women only. Conclusions: Altogether these psychosocial vulnerabilities represent one potential mechanism explaining Black women's greater risk of PTSD, although cumulative psychosocial vulnerability may be buffered by social support. Despite higher support, inner-city White women's psychosocial vulnerability may actually outweigh support's benefits for reducing trauma-related distress.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据