Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29584681›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2018

Evaluating Community Partnerships Addressing Community Resilience in Los Angeles, California.

Malcolm V Williams, Anita Chandra, Asya Spears, Danielle Varda, Kenneth B Wells, Alonzo L Plough, David P Eisenman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Frontiers in health services · 2022
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Social Network Analysis and Resilience in University Students: An Approach from Cohesiveness.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Article
  8. Article
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Malcolm V WilliamsRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA 90401, USA. mwilliam@rand.org.
Anita ChandraRAND Corporation, Arlington, VA 22202, USA. chandra@rand.org.
Asya SpearsRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA 90401, USA. aspears@rand.org.
Danielle VardaSchool of Public Affairs, University of Colorado Denver, P.O. Box 173364, Denver, CO 80217, USA. danielle.varda@ucdenver.edu.
Kenneth B WellsRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA 90401, USA. kwells@mednet.ucla.edu.
Alonzo L PloughRobert Wood Johnson Foundation, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA. aplough@rwjf.org.
David P EisenmanRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA 90401, USA. deisenman@mednet.ucla.edu.
RAND Corporation · USNeurobehavioral Systems · USRobert Wood Johnson Foundation · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · US

Funding

OPHPR CDC HHS U90 TP917012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Community resilience has grown in importance in national disaster response and recovery efforts. However, measurement of community resilience, particularly the content and quality of relationships aimed at improving resilience, is lacking. To address this gap, we used a social network survey to measure the number, type, and quality of relationships among organizations participating in 16 coalitions brought together to address community resilience in the Los Angeles Community Disaster Resilience project. These coalitions were randomized to one of two approaches (community resilience or preparedness). Resilience coalitions received training and support to develop these partnerships and implement new activities. Both coalition types received expert facilitation by a public health nurse or community educator. We also measured the activities each coalition engaged in and the extent to which partners participated in these activities at two time points. We found that the community resilience coalitions were initially larger and had lower trust among members than the preparedness communities. Over time, these trust differences dissipated. While both coalitions grew, the resilience community coalitions maintained their size difference throughout the project. We also found differences in the types of activities implemented by the resilience communities; these differences were directly related to the trainings provided. This information is useful to organizations seeking guidance on expanding the network of community-based organizations that participate in community resilience activities.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationCooperative BehaviorResilience, PsychologicalDisaster PlanningDisastersHumansLos Angelescommunity coalitionscommunity resiliencedisaster preparednessdisaster risk reductionpublic health nursingpublic health practicesocial network analysis

Identifiers

PMID29584681
PMCPMC5923652
OpenAlexW2794618154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.