Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36388301›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Medical disaster response: A critical analysis of the 2010 Haiti earthquake.

Matthew Keith Charalambos Arnaouti, Gabrielle Cahill, Michael David Baird, Laëlle Mangurat, Rachel Harris, Louidort Pierre Philippe Edme, Michelle Nyah Joseph, Tamara Worlton, Sylvio Augustin, Haiti Disaster Response – Junior Research Collaborative (HDR-JRC)

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 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. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  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

10 authors.

Matthew Keith Charalambos ArnaoutiDepartment of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Gabrielle CahillProgram in Global Surgery and Social Change, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Michael David BairdDepartment of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Laëlle ManguratProgram in Global Surgery and Social Change, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Rachel HarrisDepartment of Surgery, Uniformed Services University, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Louidort Pierre Philippe EdmeHôpital La Providence des Gonaïves, Gonaïves, Haiti.
Michelle Nyah JosephDepartment of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Tamara WorltonDepartment of Surgery, Uniformed Services University, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Sylvio AugustinHôpital de l'Universite d'Etat d'Haïti, Port-au-Prince, Haiti.
Haiti Disaster Response – Junior Research Collaborative (HDR-JRC)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: On January 12, 2010, a 7.0 magnitude earthquake struck the Republic of Haiti. The human cost was enormous-an estimated 316,000 people were killed, and a further 300,000 were injured. The scope of the disaster was matched by the scope of the response, which remains the largest multinational humanitarian response to date. An extensive scoping review of the relevant literature was undertaken, to identify studies that discussed the civilian and military disaster relief efforts. The aim was to highlight the key-lessons learned, that can be applied to future disaster response practise. Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidance was followed. Seven scientific databases were searched, using consistent search terms-followed by an analysis of the existent Haitian literature. This process was supplemented by reviewing available grey literature. A total of 2,671 articles were reviewed, 106 of which were included in the study. In-depth analysis was structured, by aligning data to 12 key-domains, whilst also considering cross-sector interaction (Civilian-Civilian, Military-Military, and Civilian-Military). Dominant themes and lessons learned were identified and recorded in an online spreadsheet by an international research team. This study focuses on explicitly analysing the medical aspects of the humanitarian response. Results: An unpreceded collaborative effort between non-governmental organisations, international militaries, and local stakeholders, led to a substantial number of disaster victims receiving life and limb-saving care. However, the response was not faultless. Relief efforts were complicated by large influxes of inexperienced actors, inadequate preliminary needs assessments, a lack of pre-existing policy regarding conduct and inter-agency collaboration, and limited consideration of post-disaster redevelopment during initial planning. Furthermore, one critical theme that bridged all aspects of the disaster response, was the failure of the international community to ensure Haitian involvement. Conclusions: No modern disaster has yet been as devastating as the 2010 Haiti earthquake. Given the ongoing climate crisis, as well as the risks posed by armed conflict-this will not remain the case indefinitely. This systematic analysis of the combined civilian and military disaster response, offers vital evidence for informing future medical relief efforts-and provides considerable opportunity to advance knowledge pertaining to disaster response.

Indexed as

DisastersEarthquakesRelief WorkHaitiHumansNeeds Assessmentdisaster responseHaiti earthquakehumanitarian responsemilitary humanitarianismUnited Nations disaster response

Identifiers

PMID36388301
PMCPMC9665839

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.