Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34153947›Full record

ArticleJournal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection2021

United States medical preparedness for nuclear and radiological emergencies.

Andrea L DiCarlo, Mary J Homer, C Norman Coleman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Almost 80 Years After Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Are World Governments and Healthcare Systems Ready for a Nuclear War?Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Anti-Ceramide ScFv Prophylaxis for First Responders to a Limited Nuclear Attack.Cellular physiology and biochemistry : international journal of experimental cellular physiology, biochemistry, and pharmacology · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Andrea L DiCarloRadiation and Nuclear Countermeasures Program (RNCP), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Rockville, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-8113-0015
Mary J HomerBiomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Washington, DC, United States of America.
C Norman ColemanRadiation Research Program (RRP), National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, United States of America.

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 AI999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the end of the Cold War in 1991, U.S. Government (USG) investments in radiation science and medical preparedness were phased out; however, the events of 11 September, which involved a terroristic attack on American soil, led to the re-establishment of funding for both radiation preparedness and development of approaches to address injuries. Similar activities have also been instituted worldwide, as the global threat of a radiological or nuclear incident continues to be a concern. Much of the USG's efforts to plan for the unthinkable have centred on establishing clear lines of communication between agencies with responsibility for triage and medical response, and external stakeholders. There have also been strong connections made between those parts of the government that establish policies, fund research, oversee regulatory approval, and purchase and stockpile necessary medical supplies. Progress made in advancing preparedness has involved a number of subject matter meetings and tabletop exercises, publication of guidance documents, assessment of available resources, clear establishment of anticipated concepts of operation for multiple radiation and nuclear scenarios, and identification/mobilization of resources. From a scientific perspective, there were clear research gaps that needed to be addressed, which included the need to identify accurate biomarkers and design biodosimetry devices to triage large numbers of civilians, develop decorporation agents that are more amenable for mass casualty use, and advance candidate products to address injuries caused by radiation exposure and thereby improve survival. Central to all these activities was the development of several different animal constructs, since efficacy testing of these approaches requires extensive work in research models that accurately simulate what would be expected in humans. Recent experiences with COVID-19 have provided an opportunity to revisit aspects of radiation preparedness, and leverage those lessons learned to enhance readiness for a possible future radiation public health emergency.

Indexed as

COVID-19Radiation ExposureTerrorismAnimalsEmergenciesHumansSARS-CoV-2United Statesanimal modelsbiodosimetrymedical countermeasurespreparednessradiationstockpileUS Government

Identifiers

PMID34153947
PMCPMC8648948

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.