ArticleScientific reports2024
Global multi-hazard risk assessment in a changing climate.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Strengthening disaster preparedness and health security in Niger state, Nigeria through a WHO STAR-based multi-hazard risk assessment.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- The state of the art and future of climate risk insurance modeling.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2024Review
- Impact-based forecasting of tropical cyclone-related human displacement to support anticipatory action.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Research on cross-regional emergency materials intelligent dispatching model in major natural disasters.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Natural hazards pose significant risks to people and assets in many regions of the world. Quantifying associated risks is crucial for many applications such as adaptation option appraisal and insurance pricing. However, traditional risk assessment approaches have focused on the impacts of single hazards, ignoring the effects of multi-hazard risks and potentially leading to underestimations or overestimations of risks. In this work, we present a framework for modelling multi-hazard risks globally in a consistent way, considering hazards, exposures, vulnerabilities, and assumptions on recovery. We illustrate the approach using river floods and tropical cyclones impacting people and physical assets on a global scale in a changing climate. To ensure physical consistency, we combine single hazard models that were driven by the same climate model realizations. Our results show that incorporating common physical drivers and recovery considerably alters the multi-hazard risk. We finally demonstrate how our framework can accommodate more than two hazards and integrate diverse assumptions about recovery processes based on a national case study. This framework is implemented in the open-source climate risk assessment platform CLIMADA and can be applied to various hazards and exposures, providing a more comprehensive approach to risk management than conventional methods.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.