Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38995875›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Unraveling the causes of the Seoul Halloween crowd-crush disaster.

Haoyang Liang, Seunghyeon Lee, Jian Sun, S C Wong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. 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

4 authors.

Haoyang LiangKey Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering, Ministry of Education, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0002-8464-9610
Seunghyeon LeeDepartment of Transportation Engineering, University of Seoul, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2356-3677
Jian SunKey Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering, Ministry of Education, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
S C WongDepartment of Civil Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1169-7045

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the world steadily recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic, managing large gatherings becomes a critical concern for ensuring crowd safety. The crowd-crush disaster in Seoul in 2022 highlights the need for effective predictive crowd management techniques. In this study, an empirical analysis of this incident is conducted using data from various sources, and model-based simulations are created to replicate hazardous crowd conditions in high-risk areas. In the empirical analysis, mobile device data indicates a significant increase in population above normal levels in the disaster area just hours before the incident occurred. In the simulations, a hydrodynamic model is employed to simulate a bidirectional collision, which quantitatively demonstrates that the average density during the crush reached 7.57 ped/m2 (with a maximum of (9.95)ped/m2). Additionally, the average crowd pressure peaked at 1,063 N/m (with a maximum of 1,961 N/m), and the maximum velocity entropy was 10.99. Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the primary causes of the disaster were the substantial population, bidirectional collision, and escalating panic. The results of controlled simulations under various management strategies are then presented. By implementing effective crowd management techniques, crowd safety can be enhanced through quantitative comparisons of these key indicators.

Indexed as

COVID-19CrowdingComputer SimulationDisastersHumansMass GatheringsModels, TheoreticalPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Seoul

Identifiers

PMID38995875
PMCPMC11244771

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.