Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32953440›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of disaster risk reduction : IJDRR2020

"

Lesley Gray, Ashleigh Rushton, Matthew Hobbs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of disaster risk reduction : IJDRR, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Lesley GrayDepartment of Primary Health Care & General Practice, University of Otago, Wellington, 6242, Aotearoa, New Zealand.
Ashleigh RushtonJoint Centre for Disaster Research, Massey University, Wellington, Aotearoa, New Zealand.
Matthew HobbsHealth Sciences, College of Education, Health and Human Development, University of Canterbury, Aotearoa, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPeople have been left behind in disasters directly associated with their size, shape, and weight and are disproportionately impacted in pandemics. Despite alignment with known vulnerabilities such as poverty, age, and disability, the literature is inaudible on body mass. Emergency managers report little or no information on body mass prevalence. This exploratory study aimed to illustrate population prevalence of high body mass for emergency planning.

methodsCross-sectional data from the New Zealand Health Survey were pooled for the years 2013/14-2017/18 (n = 68 053 adults aged ≥15 years). Height and weight were measured and used to calculate body mass index. The prevalence of high body mass were mapped to emergency management boundary shapefiles. The resulting maps were piloted with emergency managers.

resultsMaps highlight the population prevalence of high body mass across emergency management regions, providing a visual tool. A pilot with 14 emergency managers assessed the utility of such mapping. On the basis of the visual information, the tool prompted 12 emergency managers to consider such groups in regional planning and to discuss needs.

conclusionsVisual mapping is a useful tool to highlight population prevalence of groups likely to be at higher risk in disasters. This is believed to be the first study to map high body mass for the purposes of emergency planning. Future research is required to identify prevalence at a finer geographical scale. More features in the local context such as physical location features, risk and vulnerability features could also be included in future research.

Indexed as

Disaster risk reductionEmergency managementGeographical information mappingObesityRisk communication

Identifiers

PMID32953440
PMCPMC7486187

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.