Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40160419›Full record

ReviewiScience2025

From static to dynamic: Conceptual and operational developments of vulnerability.

Iuliana Armaș, Andra-Cosmina Albulescu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in iScience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Iuliana ArmașCenter for Risk Studies, Spatial Modelling, Terrestrial and Coastal System Dynamics, Faculty of Geography, University of Bucharest, 030018 Bucharest, Romania.
Andra-Cosmina AlbulescuCenter for Risk Studies, Spatial Modelling, Terrestrial and Coastal System Dynamics, Faculty of Geography, University of Bucharest, 030018 Bucharest, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Starting with the end of the last century, vulnerability has gained traction as a predictable and modellable component in the risk equation. Today, its diverse interpretations and assessment frameworks reflect both the vitality of research in this area and the potential for confusion. This paper aims to enhance the understanding of vulnerability by reflecting on existing research and addressing its different nuances, ultimately guiding future vulnerability research. We provide a critical view on the evolution of vulnerability, tracing its shift from a static measure of an element's capacity to be harmed by hazards, to a multifaceted, dynamic concept. We explore various vulnerability definitions, cross-disciplinary approaches, models that integrate vulnerability, global patterns, and assessment tools. The drivers behind the shift of vulnerability from a static to a dynamic concept, together with the conceptual and operational frameworks necessary to achieve this transition, are also extensively discussed. This effort brings together snapshots of an ongoing and intricate approach to vulnerability and underscores the need for continued research.

Indexed as

Earth sciencesHuman geographySocial sciences

Identifiers

PMID40160419
PMCPMC11951036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.