ReviewJournal of education and health promotion2020
Evaluating the disaster preparedness of emergency medical service agencies in the world: A systematic literature review protocol.
Review in Journal of education and health promotion, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acceptability and applicability of using virtual reality for training mass casualty incidents- a mixed method study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- The development of disaster preparedness education for public: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Delivering emergency care at the religious mass gathering of India: an amalgamation of technology and spirituality-an institutional experience of managing pilgrims at Mahakumbh Prayagraj.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Biomimetic method of emergency life channel urban planning in Wuhan using slime mold networks.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Disaster preparedness in emergency medical service agencies: A systematic review.Journal of education and health promotion · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDisasters occur almost everywhere in the world, and preparation is essential. Preparedness is an effective approach for disaster management, and it is crucial for the health systems, especially the Emergency Medical Service (EMS) agencies. This systematic review will be conducted to assess the preparedness levels of EMS agencies in the world for the response to disasters and explore the key dimensions and strategies to enhance it. METHODOLOGY: This systematic literature review will be conducted to search comprehensively the articles published between 2000 and 2019 to explore the disaster preparedness of EMS Agencies. To this end, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar will be thoroughly assessed. The following terms and expression will be used for searching the databases: "EMS" and other keywords "Disaster Preparedness," "Mass Casualty Incident," "Mass Gathering," "Terrorist incident," "Weapons of Mass Destruction," and CBRNE, Disaster, included: 'Emergency Preparedness, Preparedness, Readiness. DISCUSSION: To the best of our knowledge, no systematic review study has been conducted on disaster preparedness of EMS agencies in the world. This is the first study to address this gape. It will also explore the key dimensions of disaster preparedness in EMS services and the strategies to enhance their preparedness.
conclusionIdentifying the key dimensions of disaster preparedness is the first step in designing valid assessment tools to evaluate disaster preparedness of EMS service. This study will provide valuable guides for EMS administrators and researchers in an attempt to enhance of preparedness of EMS systems in disasters.
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.