ArticleBMC public health2024
Post-disaster damage and loss assessment in the Iranian healthcare sector: a qualitative interview study.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate post-disaster damage and loss assessment is critical for the success of subsequent recovery programs. A comprehensive and systematic damage and loss assessment process involves evaluating the physical damage and financial impact of an event on individuals, communities, and assets. To ensure effective recovery, the various components and entities included in the program must be developed appropriately and efficiently. This study aimed to identify the components and entities of the Iranian healthcare sector's post-disaster damage and loss assessment program.
methodsA qualitative study employing purposive sampling and semi-structured individual interviews was conducted with 18 participants between October 2022 and July 2023, with continuing until data saturation was achieved. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews and observational notes with experts, including representatives from the National Disaster Management Organization (NDMO), the Iranian Red Crescent Society, and the Disaster Risk Management Department of the Ministry of Health and Medical Sciences Universities. The interviews were conducted in the workplace of the participants. Thematic analysis, a conventional qualitative method, was employed for the analysis of the data. Following the transcription of the recorded interviews, the initial codes were extracted, reviewed for accuracy, and classified.
resultsThe results of this study are based on the insights and experiences of a diverse group of qualified experts in their respective fields. The findings were analysed and classification into ten main themes, 29 sub-themes, and 1,058 codes. The main themes were key concepts and principles of assessment; assessment stages; health system measures in assessment; roles and responsibilities; team composition; information and communication; coordination and collaboration; data collection and analysis; assessment tools and methods; and reporting, documentation, and recommendations.
conclusionAn understanding of key concepts and principles enables stakeholders to respond effectively to disasters, make informed decisions, and facilitate recovery and reconstruction efforts.
Indexed as
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.