Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38444622›Full record

ArticleJamba (Potchefstroom, South Africa)2024

Research methods challenges: A case study of preparedness in The Bahamas.

Trevor O Johnson, Jessica Jensen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Jamba (Potchefstroom, South Africa), 2024. 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

2 authors.

Trevor O JohnsonDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, North Dakota State University, Fargo, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3573-781X
Jessica JensenDepartment of Emergency and Disaster Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, North Dakota State University, Fargo, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9644-5116

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Disaster research is essential for developing more robust and contextualised policies. It is, therefore, no surprise that multilateral organisations like the United Nations and the World Bank have called for enhanced disaster-related frameworks, legislation and policies in developing countries using quality data. However, internal and external researchers and practitioners often face significant challenges collecting data in these nations because of a range of problems including, but not limited to, incomplete sampling frames, inadequate infrastructure or unstable governments. This reality leads one to question: is the cart coming before the horse? This study explored individual and household (IH) preparedness in The Bahamas - a small island developing state in the Caribbean. An online survey was used, and 629 Bahamians opted to participate. However, the researchers faced many barriers to collecting representative data. This case study, therefore, discusses the range of methodological challenges faced by the researchers and their impact on this study. Contribution: This article substantially contributes to the disaster literature by exploring the challenges associated with conducting IH preparedness research in The Bahamas. This article also reminds practitioners and academics of the issues associated with collecting data in developing nations and its implications for policy enhancement and development. Furthermore, the authors present various recommendations ranging from enhanced funding to recognising the need for methodological innovation to support continuous research in countries like The Bahamas.

Indexed as

developing countriesmethodologicalpreparednessresearchThe Bahamas

Identifiers

PMID38444622
PMCPMC10913130

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.