ReviewBMC public health2017
A comparative assessment of major international disasters: the need for exposure assessment, systematic emergency preparedness, and lifetime health care.
Review in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dose-Dependent Dual Effects of Gradient Ionizing Radiation on Neurocognition.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Identifying the components of prehospital emergency preparedness in radiological and nuclear incidents: a scoping review.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Provision of Evidence-Informed Psychological Interventions Following the Queensland (Australia) 2010-11 Floods and Cyclones; the Barriers and Successes.The Australian journal of rural health · 2025Article
- Poison Center Surveillance of Occupational Incidents with Hazardous Materials (2016-2023): Insights for Risk Mitigation and Incident Preparedness.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- The epidemiological profile and morbidity-mortality patterns of technological disasters in the Americas from 2000 to 2021: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Hospitalizations in the public health system and mining disasters in Mariana and Brumadinho, Brazil.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- An Assessment of the Ocular Toxicity of Two Major Sources of Environmental Exposure.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- The Field's mass shooting: emergency medical services response.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Health Research in the Wake of Disasters: Challenges and Opportunities for Sensor Science.Environmental health perspectives · 2023Article
- [Qualitative analysis of health preparedness policies in ChileUma análise qualitativa das políticas de preparação na área de saúde no Chile].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2023Article
- Long-Term Mental Health Support after Natural Hazard Events: A Report from an Online Survey among Experts in Japan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- 3Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2022Article
- The ongoing activities of livelihood support counselors following nuclear disaster under the COVID-19 restrictions: A preliminary survey.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- A Biomarker-Centric Approach to Drug Discovery and Development: Lessons Learned from the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2021Review
- Comparative risk assessment of non-communicable diseases by evacuation scenario- a retrospective study in the 7 years following the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident.Global health action · 2021Article
- Broadening the Mandate of the Incident Command System to Address Community Mental and Behavioral Health Effects as Part of the Federal Response to Disasters.Current environmental health reports · 2020Review
- Long-Term Impact of Disasters on the Public Health System: A Multi-Case Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Enhancing Career Paths for Tomorrow's Radiation Oncologists.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2019Review
- Health outcomes of the July 14, 2016 Nice terror attack among hospital-based professionals and students: the « ECHOS de Nice » health survey protocol.BMC public health · 2019Observational
- Hospital, health, and community burden after oil refinery fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe disasters at Seveso, Three Mile Island, Bhopal, Chernobyl, the World Trade Center (WTC) and Fukushima had historic health and economic sequelae for large populations of workers, responders and community members.
methodsComparative data from these events were collected to derive indications for future preparedness. Information from the primary sources and a literature review addressed: i) exposure assessment; ii) exposed populations; iii) health surveillance; iv) follow-up and research outputs; v) observed physical and mental health effects; vi) treatment and benefits; and vii) outreach activities.
resultsExposure assessment was conducted in Seveso, Chernobyl and Fukushima, although none benefited from a timely or systematic strategy, yielding immediate and sequential measurements after the disaster. Identification of exposed subjects was overall underestimated. Health surveillance, treatment and follow-up research were implemented in Seveso, Chernobyl, Fukushima, and at the WTC, mostly focusing on the workers and responders, and to a lesser extent on residents. Exposure-related physical and mental health consequences were identified, indicating the need for a long-term health care of the affected populations. Fukushima has generated the largest scientific output so far, followed by the WTCHP and Chernobyl. Benefits programs and active outreach figured prominently in only the WTC Health Program. The analysis of these programs yielded the following lessons: 1) Know who was there; 2) Have public health input to the disaster response; 3) Collect health and needs data rapidly; 4) Take care of the affected; 5) Emergency preparedness; 6) Data driven, needs assessment, advocacy.
conclusionsGiven the long-lasting health consequences of natural and man-made disasters, health surveillance and treatment programs are critical for management of health conditions, and emergency preparedness plans are needed to prevent or minimize the impact of future threats.
Indexed as
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.