Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37576234›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

Disparities in access and association between access to critical facilities during day-to-day and disrupted access as a result of storm extreme weather events.

Flavia Ioana Patrascu, Ali Mostafavi, Arnold Vedlitz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 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

3 authors.

Flavia Ioana PatrascuUrban Resilience.AI Lab, Zachry Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843, USA.
Ali MostafaviUrban Resilience.AI Lab, Zachry Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843, USA.
Arnold VedlitzPublic Policy, Bush School of Government and Public Service, A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between households' access to critical facilities day-to-day and during weather-related extreme events. Despite a robust understanding of both day-to-day access and access during disasters, the interplay between the two remains unclear. To bridge this knowledge gap, we propose a novel empirical approach, using a Texas statewide household survey (N = 810). The survey evaluates day-to-day and past events access, exploring the experiences of respondents during multiple recent disasters, rather than focusing on a specific hazard. Using correlation analysis, we examined various access-related factors such as day-to-day trip duration, alternative trip duration, and loss of access during past events. Additionally, we evaluated the association between access-related factors and sociodemographic characteristics such as income, ethnicity, and urban status. The results indicate: (1) daily trip duration to critical facilities is associated with disrupted access during storm events, and (2) disparities persist during both day-to-day times and during extreme events. These results bring new insights to the existing body of knowledge on day-to-day access and access during disasters. The findings provide scientifically grounded evidence to city managers and planners, emphasizing the need for equitable distribution of facilities to enhance access to essential facilities both in daily life and during extreme weather-related events.

Indexed as

Critical facilitiesDisastersEquitable accessResilience

Identifiers

PMID37576234
PMCPMC10412829

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.