Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36078323›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Construction and Evaluation of a Safe Community Evaluation Index System-A Study of Urban China.

Chao Feng, Jingjie Wu, Juan Du

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Chao FengSchool of Public Administration, Northwest University, Xi'an 710127, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9316-9494
Jingjie WuSchool of Economics, Northwest University of Political Science and Law, Xi'an 710063, China.
Juan DuSchool of Management, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A community is the basic unit of a city. Scientific and effective evaluations of the construction effect of safe communities can improve the construction capacity of community disaster prevention and mitigation; it is also the basis for improving urban public safety and realizing stable and sustainable urban operation. First, following the development framework of a safe community and taking two typical communities in Xi'an, China, as examples, based on the literature and expert opinions, the initial indicators of a safe community are determined. Second, based on existing data, the literature and expert opinions, a questionnaire is designed, and the reliability and validity of the questionnaire are tested by exploratory factor analysis. Third, the indicators for evaluating the construction ability of a safe community are selected. Finally, an evaluation model of the construction ability of safe communities is constructed by using the comprehensive weighting technique for order of preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS), which is applied to the actual evaluation of eighteen representative communities in Xi'an. The main findings are as follows. (1) The sense of community security is the collective consciousness of community residents. It includes not only the security and feelings of community residents themselves, but also the cognition of the impact of social policies at the macro and micro-levels on community residents, their families, and even the whole community. (2) From the three levels of consciousness, technology, and policy as the starting points for the construction of the theoretical model of a safe community, organizational resilience, accessibility resilience, social environmental resilience, and capital resilience are found to be the main influencing factors in the construction of a safe community. (3) Using questionnaires and expert interviews to preliminarily screen evaluation indicators and using the comprehensive weighting TOPSIS method to build an evaluation model can effectively avoid the defects of traditional empirical research on the validity and reliability of methods. (4) The ranking of the eighteen representative communities in the empirical analysis is basically consistent with the selection results of the national comprehensive disaster reduction demonstration community, which indicates the effectiveness and accuracy of the indicators and algorithms.

Indexed as

Public PolicyChinaCitiesFactor Analysis, StatisticalHumansReproducibility of Resultsdisaster prevention and mitigationrisk factorssafe communitysustainable developmenturban public safety

Identifiers

PMID36078323
PMCPMC9518203

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.