ReviewJournal of acute medicine2019
Review in Journal of acute medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimum data set harmonization in the management of cross-border Multi Casualty Incidents. Modified Delphi (VALKYRIES-H2020 project).PloS one · 2024Article
- Emergency Medical Services in Taiwan: Past, Present, and Future.Journal of acute medicine · 2023Review
- Preparation of Medical Supply for Prehospital Emergencies and Disasters: An Internet-Based Simulation Drill.Journal of acute medicine · 2023Article
- Examining the Disaster Response Twenty Years After the 1999 Chi-Chi Earthquake.Journal of acute medicine · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to examine scientific publications that were related to disaster medicine and were authored by emergency medicine physicians in Taiwan. This descriptive study utilized the electronic databases of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Academic works that were published between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2018, were collected for review and analysis. Of the 53 articles included in the final analysis,40 (75.5%) were original research, 3 (5.7%) were reviews, 1 (1.9%) was a brief report, and 9 (17.0%) were perspectives. The top 5 themes were disaster response systems (17, 32.1%), endemic diseases (11, 20.8%), emergency department (ED) overcrowding (10, 18.9%), earthquakes (10, 18.9%), and ED administration (9, 17.0%). Sixteen (30.2%) articles involved international collaborations. The median, interquartile range and range of the numbers of citations of the articles were 3, 1-11, and 0-65, respectively. Twenty-four (45.3%) articles were related to specific incidents: the Chi-Chi earthquake in 1999 (n = 5), the Singapore airline crash in 2000 (n = 1), Typhoon Nari in 2001 (n = 1), the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome in 2003 (n = 7), Typhoon Morakot in 2009 (n = 1), the color party explosion in Formosa Fun Coast Park in 2015 (n = 4), and the Tainan earthquake in 2016 (n = 5). Regarding the study methods, 19 (35.8%) articles were quantitative studies; 10 (18.9%) were qualitative or semiqualitative studies; 8 (15.1%) used questionnaire surveys; 3 (5.7%) were literature reviews; 3 (5.7%) used computer simulations; and 10 (18.9%) were descriptive/narrative or other types of studies. Though the number of academic publications related to disaster medicine from the EDs in Taiwan is relatively limited, the quality and diversity of research seem promising. The research environment and education programs on disaster medicine in Taiwan deserve thoughtful consideration.
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.