ArticlePLoS currents2014
The effectiveness of disaster risk communication: a systematic review of intervention studies.
Article in PLoS currents, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk communication in mass gatherings: a scoping review.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Review
- Communication channel preference for raising rabies awareness among dog owners in Thailand: A nationwide study.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Priming close social contact protective behaviors enhances protective social norms perceptions, protection views, and self-protective behaviors during disasters.International journal of disaster risk reduction : IJDRR · 2022Article
- Creating Effective, Evidence-Based Video Communication of Public Health Science (COVCOM Study): Protocol for a Sequential Mixed Methods Effect Study.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Medical education and COVID-19 pandemic: a crisis management model towards an evolutionary pathway.Education and information technologies · 2022Article
- Communication vs evidence: What hinders the outreach of science during an infodemic? A narrative review.Integrative medicine research · 2021Review
- Health authorities' health risk communication with the public during pandemics: a rapid scoping review.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Flood risk perceptions and coping capacities among the retired population, with implications for risk communication: A study of residents in a north Wales coastal town, UK.International journal of disaster risk reduction : IJDRR · 2020Article
- Assessing the Reliability of Relevant Tweets and Validation Using Manual and Automatic Approaches for Flood Risk Communication.ISPRS international journal of geo-information · 2020Article
- The Power of Radio to Promote Health and Resilience in Natural Disasters: A Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Review
- Planning of a Health Emergency Disaster Risk Management Programme for a Chinese Ethnic Minority Community.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Household Preparedness and Preferred Communication Channels in Public Health Emergencies: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Residents in an Asian Developed Urban City.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionA disaster is a serious disruption to the functioning of a community that exceeds its capacity to cope within its own resources. Risk communication in disasters aims to prevent and mitigate harm from disasters, prepare the population before a disaster, disseminate information during disasters and aid subsequent recovery. The aim of this systematic review is to identify, appraise and synthesise the findings of studies of the effects of risk communication interventions during four stages of the disaster cycle.
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science and grey literature sources for randomised trials, cluster randomised trials, controlled and uncontrolled before and after studies, interrupted time series studies and qualitative studies of any method of disaster risk communication to at-risk populations. Outcome criteria were disaster-related knowledge and behaviour, and health outcomes.
resultsSearches yielded 5,224 unique articles, of which 100 were judged to be potentially relevant. Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria, and two additional studies were identified from other searching. The studies evaluated interventions in all four stages of the disaster cycle, included a variety of man-made, natural and infectious disease disasters, and were conducted in many disparate settings. Only one randomised trial and one cluster randomised trial were identified, with less robust designs used in the other studies. Several studies reported improvements in disaster-related knowledge and behaviour. DISCUSSION: We identified and appraised intervention studies of disaster risk communication and present an overview of the contemporary literature. Most studies used non-randomised designs that make interpretation challenging. We do not make specific recommendations for practice but highlight the need for high-quality randomised trials and appropriately-analysed cluster randomised trials in the field of disaster risk communication where these can be conducted within an appropriate research ethics framework.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.