ArticleBMJ open2025
Theory development of under what circumstances and what works for promoting disaster preparedness among long-term care facility (LTCF) stakeholders: protocol for realist review.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe incidence of severe natural disasters has been increasing worldwide. The residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are particularly vulnerable to such events. Therefore, promoting disaster preparedness among LTCF stakeholders is urgent. However, the optimal preparedness process remains unclear. To close this gap, we use a realist review (RR) to promote an understanding of under what circumstances and what works for promoting the disaster preparedness among LTCF stakeholders and develop theories for the process. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: RR will be guided by the Realist and Meta-Narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standard. The following five steps will be employed: (1) literature review and search for evidence, (2) study selection, (3) data extraction, (4) data synthesis and (5) development of the initial programme theory (IPT). Evidence will be searched using MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus and ICHUSHI (a Japanese database). Grey literature and citation tracking will also be used. Documents of any design or publication type will be included. The study selection, coding and synthesis will be conducted independently by two authors. An IPT will be developed in the Context-Mechanism-Outcome configuration to understand how to promote disaster preparedness among LTCF stakeholders. The developed IPT will be verified by experts or stakeholders to enhance its validity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval will not be required because this is a review of published literature. The results will be disseminated at scientific conferences and peer-reviewed journals. The developed IPT will be used in subsequent research and iteratively tested or refined to better explain under what circumstances and what works for promoting disaster preparedness among LTCF stakeholders. REGISTRATION DETAILS: This protocol has been registered at the Open Science Framework https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/J4TU6.
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.