Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35474323›Full record

ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2023

A dynamic Bayesian network-based emergency decision-making framework highlighting emergency propagations: Illustrated using the Fukushima nuclear accidents and the Covid-19 pandemic.

Yinan Cai, Michael W Golay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Yinan CaiDepartment of Nuclear Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9870-5989
Michael W GolayDepartment of Nuclear Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When facing public emergencies, human societies need to make decisions rapidly in order to mitigate the problems. However, this process can be difficult due to complexity of the emergency scenarios and lack of systematic methods for analyzing them. In the work reported here, we develop a framework based upon dynamic Bayesian networks in order to simulate emergency scenarios and support corresponding decisions. In this framework, we highlight the importance of emergency propagation, which is a critical factor often ignored by decisionmakers. We illustrate that failure of considering emergency propagation can lead to suboptimal mitigation strategies. By incorporating this critical factor, our framework enables decisionmakers to identify optimal response strategies minimizing emergency impacts. Scenarios developed from two public emergencies: the 2011 Fukushima nuclear power plant accidents and the Covid-19 pandemic, are utilized to illustrate the framework in this paper. Capabilities of the framework in supporting decision making in both events illustrate its generality and adaptability when dealing with complex real-world situations. Our analysis results reveal many similarities between these two seemingly distinct events. This indicates that seemingly unrelated emergencies can share many common features beyond their idiosyncratic characteristics. Valuable mitigation insights can be obtained by analyzing a broad range of past emergencies systematically.

Indexed as

COVID-19Fukushima Nuclear AccidentBayes TheoremEmergenciesHumansPandemicsCovid-19 pandemicdecision supportemergency preparednessFukushima nuclear accidentsrisk propagation

Identifiers

PMID35474323
PMCPMC9115531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.