ArticleDisaster medicine and public health preparedness2024
Understanding Barriers and Facilitators to Disaster Preparedness in Federally Qualified Health Centers in the United States: A Mixed Methods Study.
Article in Disaster medicine and public health preparedness, 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.
- Temporal Trends and Geographic Clustering of U.S. Weather-Related Disasters (1989-2019): A Foundational Baseline for Healthcare Preparedness.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Challenges and opportunities to addressing non-communicable diseases after climate-related disasters in Mozambique: a qualitative study.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Developing a community-prioritized research agenda on primary care strategies for minimizing the health impacts of heat and poor air quality events: protocol.Frontiers in climate · 2025Article
- Has the COVID-19 pandemic enhanced the capacity of rural public health emergency management? Evidence from Jiangsu Province of China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Lessons From Federally Qualified Health Centers in the US Territories on Managing Non-Communicable Diseases in the Setting of Disasters: A Qualitative Study Using the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) Framework.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSevere weather events exacerbate existing health disparities due to poorly managed non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Our objective is to understand the experiences of staff, providers, and administrators (employees) of Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands (USVI) in providing care to patients living with NCDs in the setting of recent climate-related extreme events.
methodsWe used a convergent mixed-methods study design. A quantitative survey was distributed to employees at 2 FQHCs in Puerto Rico and the USVI, assessing experience with disasters, knowledge of disaster preparedness, the relevance of NCDs, and perceived gaps. Qualitative in-depth interviews explored their experience providing care for NCDs during recent disasters. Quantitative and qualitative data were merged using a narrative approach.
resultsThrough the integration of quantitative and qualitative data, we recognize: (1) significant gaps in confidence and preparedness of employees with a need for more training; (2) challenges faced by persons with multiple NCDs, especially cardiovascular and mental health disorders; and (3) most clinicians do not discuss disaster preparedness with patients but recognize their important role in community resilience.
conclusionWith these results, we recommend strengthening the capacity of FQHCs to address the needs of their patients with NCDs in disasters.
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.