Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38274674›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023

Do first responders and populations perceive risks similarly? A comparative study of seven countries.

Nathan Stolero, Sahar Elkady, Leire Labaka, Maya Siman Tov, Kobi Peleg, Bruria Adini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. 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

6 authors.

Nathan StoleroDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Management, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Sahar ElkadyTECNUN-University of Navarra, San Sebastian, Spain.
Leire LabakaTECNUN-University of Navarra, San Sebastian, Spain.
Maya Siman TovDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Management, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Kobi PelegIsrael Academic College, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Bruria AdiniDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Management, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Risk perception illustrates the subjective evaluation of individuals concerning the characteristics, severity, and capacity to cope with potential hazards. Risk perception influences attitudes and actions individuals take to protect themselves from future threats. Risk perceptions might change among different stakeholder groups such as society and first responders. Identifying risk perceptions of stakeholders is essential to establish effective protective measures. Method: This study investigated the commonalities and diversities in risk perception among first responders and the public, within and between seven European and beyond countries. A self-administered questionnaire was used to gather data from both first responders and civilians. They were asked to assess their risk perception level for five categories of risks (Extreme weather-related events, nature-related events, social disruptions, critical services dependencies, and pandemics). Results: Using Univariate Analysis of Variance showed disparity concerning both the levels of risk perception between the public and first responders, as well as their relative ranking. For example, concerning extreme weather-related and nature-related events, risk perception levels of the first responders is higher than that of the population in six out of the seven studied countries. In contrast, the population's risk perception is higher compared to the first responders in six out of the seven countries, concerning critical infrastructure dependencies and pandemics. Discussion: The relative gaps between the first responders versus the population, within each country, vary considerably. Norway for example presents significant differences between the two internal populations concerning all risks (except for extreme weather), while in Sweden, no significant gaps were identified, concerning all five risks.

Indexed as

critical services dependenciesextreme weathernature-related eventspandemicsresiliencerisk perceptionsocial disruptions

Identifiers

PMID38274674
PMCPMC10809848

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.