Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34870543›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of radiation biology2022

Preparedness for a 'no-notice' mass-casualty incident: a nuclear detonation scenario.

C Norman Coleman, Kenneth D Cliffer, Andrea L DiCarlo, Mary J Homer, Brian R Moyer, Shannon G Loelius, Adam W Tewell, Judith L Bader, John F Koerner

Abstract readConference Proceedings
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of radiation biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Sex differences in radiation research.International journal of radiation biology · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors.

C Norman ColemanDepartment of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Washington, DC, USA.
Kenneth D ClifferDepartment of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Washington, DC, USA.
Andrea L DiCarloRadiation and Nuclear Countermeasures Program, Division of Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA.
Mary J HomerDepartment of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Washington, DC, USA.
Brian R MoyerDepartment of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Washington, DC, USA.
Shannon G LoeliusDepartment of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Washington, DC, USA.
Adam W TewellDepartment of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Washington, DC, USA.
Judith L BaderDepartment of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Washington, DC, USA.
John F KoernerDepartment of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 AI999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAn effective response for a mass-casualty incident requires understanding the relevant basic science and physical impact; detailed preparedness among jurisdictions; and clear, sequential response planning, including formal operational exercises, logistics, interagency, and public-private coordination, rapid activation of resilience, and continual improvement from lessons learned and new knowledge. This ConRad 2021 meeting report describes steps for civilian medical and public health response planning for a nuclear detonation; the utility of this type of planning for broader application; and extension of this planning to the international community.

conclusionA nuclear detonation requires a response within minutes to what will be a large-scale disaster complicated by radiation, including some elements that are similar to a broad range of incidents. The response could be further complicated if multiple incidents occur simultaneously. Required are detailed planning, preparedness and scripting for an immediate operational response, addressing clinical manifestations of evolving radiation illness, and flexibility to adapt to a rapidly changing situation. This need translates into the use of just-in-time information; effective, credible communication; situational awareness on a global scale; and a template upon which to apply capabilities in a multi-sector response. This effort is greatly facilitated using a 'playbook' approach, the basics of which are presented.

Indexed as

Disaster PlanningMass Casualty IncidentsRadiation InjuriesHumansdisaster responseemergency playbookmass-casualtynuclear detonationradiation accidentResponse

Identifiers

PMID34870543
PMCPMC9050796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.