ArticleInternational journal of preventive medicine2025
Challenges of Disaster Assessment of Readiness and Training Guideline (DART) in Iran's Primary Health Care.
Article in International journal of preventive medicine, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: DART (Disaster Assessment of Readiness and Training program) is one of the five Disaster Risk Reduction Management Programs (DRRMP) in Primary Health Care (PHC) of Iran. The guidelines for this program have not been revised in more than 10 years. The aim of this study is to critically evaluate the current guideline. Methods: This was A qualitative research by Focus Group Discussion (FGD) using the Eisner's educational connoisseurship and criticism model performed in Isfahan Medical Sciences University, Iran during 2024. The study population included seven experts who are familiar with the DRRMP and Eisner's model. Sampling method was purposeful and the FGD group members were selected by the researcher. Data collection was done through 1) WHO handbook for guideline development, 2) WHO Health Emergency, Disaster Risk Management Framework (H-EDRM), 3) A new framework of Primary Health Care (PHC) disaster preparedness and 4) Comparison of DART guideline with Stanford, FEMA and British Columbia household preparedness guidelines. Results: In this study, four main categories were found in the educational criticism of the DART guideline: simplicity in design and development, lack of layout in pages and lack of user-friendly features (descriptions), sharp visual and content criticism for the minimum essential context of a guideline (interpretation), Little conformity of visual criteria and relative conformity of content criteria with global samples (evaluation).Finally, Thematic phase indicated that current guidelines do not meet the expectations of health care providers (HCPs), effective educational promotion of guidelines is needed, and adaptation to lifestyle and cultural customs and actual educational needs were also issues that could be considered. Conclusions: Visual and content criticism based on Eisner's model showed some of the basic components of the formulation and implementation of a guideline. Modifying and revising the DART guideline based on this information and scientific processes and continuous needs assessment can create an effective result in the development of improved guidelines.
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.