ArticleDisaster medicine and public health preparedness2022
Article in Disaster medicine and public health preparedness, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The invisible frontline: experiences of public health workers during the COVID-19 pandemic and health emergencies in Colombia.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
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
Abstract
objectiveRecent disasters have demonstrated gaps in employers' preparedness to protect employees and promote their well-being in the face of disruptive events. Our objective was to develop a useful strategy for advancing comprehensive employer preparedness and to assess employer preparedness in a sample of employers.
methodsA
resultsSeventy-six responded, representing diverse employment sectors. The mean Index score was 8.8 (out of 23), which is a moderate level of preparedness. Nine scored over 15, indicating greater preparedness. Thirteen scored 0. Employers were most prepared for severe weather events and least prepared for acts of violence. There were no significant differences by sector, size, or reach, although the health-care sector reported higher scores.
conclusionsThis unique attempt to assess TWH Employer Preparedness can serve as the basis of important further study that strengthens the empirical basis of the construct. Additionally, the Model, Survey, and Index can assist employers in advancing their preparedness for all hazards.
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.