ArticleEvaluation and program planning2019
Integrating the resources of Korean disaster management research via the Johari window.
Article in Evaluation and program planning, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Analysis of Sustainable Communication Patterns during the Telework Period in Western Romanian Corporations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is not widely known that quite a few researchers are faced with difficulties in using various resources of disaster management research in Korea. The article aims to assess how rigorously the Korean field of disaster management research resources has been managed or how it can be improved for the ultimate goal of disaster management. Descriptive content analysis has been used as the major methodology by referring to the Johari window. In doing so, electronic research resources have been systematically compared with integrated research resources via the perspective of Korean-speaking researchers and that of English-speaking researchers. The conclusion is that two researchers have to be integrated with all four research resources (open, blind, hidden, and unknown resources) by implementing assigned responsibilities as well as freely asking questions. Ultimately, this will be conducive to reducing down the impacts of disaster in Korea.
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.