Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29652927›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Public perceptions of emergency decontamination: Effects of intervention type and responder management strategy during a focus group study.

Holly Carter, Dale Weston, Naomi Betts, Simon Wilkinson, Richard Amlôt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Mass Casualty Decontamination for Chemical Incidents: Research Outcomes and Future Priorities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  2. 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

5 authors.

Holly CarterEmergency Response Department Science & Technology, Public Health England, Porton Down, Salisbury, Wiltshire, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2084-7263
Dale WestonEmergency Response Department Science & Technology, Public Health England, Porton Down, Salisbury, Wiltshire, United Kingdom.
Naomi BettsEmergency Response Department Science & Technology, Public Health England, Porton Down, Salisbury, Wiltshire, United Kingdom.
Simon WilkinsonMedical Toxicology Centre, Newcastle University, Wolfson Building, Claremont Place, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Richard AmlôtEmergency Response Department Science & Technology, Public Health England, Porton Down, Salisbury, Wiltshire, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the event of an incident involving the release of a hazardous chemical, first responders may decide to initiate emergency decontamination in order to remove any contaminant from affected casualties. Recent initiatives such as the UK Home Office-led Initial Operational Response Programme have introduced new evidence-based decontamination protocols that reduce the time taken to initiate the decontamination process, including an increased emphasis on rapidly removing contaminated clothing (disrobe), and the use of improvised dry decontamination methods. The current study used a series of focus groups to examine public perceptions of different decontamination interventions and responder management strategies. Results revealed that a decontamination shower was perceived to be more effective than dry decontamination methods and that a management strategy that included effective responder communication resulted in increased willingness to comply with the need for decontamination. This study demonstrates that public understanding and acceptance of novel decontamination methods such as dry decontamination may present additional challenges for first responders. Increased emphasis on effective communication during decontamination is needed. Furthermore, provision of information during the focus group study resulted in an increase in participants' knowledge and confidence in taking recommended decontamination actions, which was maintained three months after the study. The longitudinal nature of these effects suggest that it may be possible to increase public awareness about actions to take during chemical incidents by developing pre-incident public education; however, further research is needed to examine this more fully.

Indexed as

Chemical Hazard ReleaseDecontaminationEmergenciesPerceptionPublic OpinionAdolescentAdultAgedCommunicationDisaster PlanningEmergency RespondersFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID29652927
PMCPMC5898741

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.