Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40533718›Full record

ReviewAmbio2025

Foraging supply chains: Investigating disaster for improved food provisioning.

Hana Trollman, Sandeep Jagtap, Sonia D Tamakloe, Frank Trollman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ambio, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Hana TrollmanUniversity of Leicester School of Business, Leicester, UK. ht203@leicester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2564-282X
Sandeep JagtapDivision of Engineering Logistics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Sonia D TamakloeUniversity of Leicester School of Business, Leicester, UK.
Frank TrollmanTrauma and Orthopaedics Department, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton, Derby, UK.

Funding

Research England 11155
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Disasters such as COVID-19 and the Russia-Ukraine war are drawing attention to the provisioning of food during crises. The main concern has been quickly establishing a stable food supply. However, climate change and public health concerns are shifting attention to the critical gap in identifying the minimal considerations that would adequately address ecological disaster food provisioning. A meta-ethnography of 16 disasters in 12 different countries is employed to identify the activities and their supporting strategies that provide benefits to existing actors within food networks. Analysis suggests that public health, resilience, and sustainability stand to benefit from the identified practices. A conceptual model of an ecologically embedded minimum viable ecosystem for disaster food provisioning is proposed. Exemplar applications are provided for Tigray, Gaza, and Ukraine. The findings may be applied to disaster settings for the development of policy for culturally sensitive, equitable, and nutritious food provisioning strategies.

Indexed as

COVID-19DisastersFood SupplyClimate ChangeHumansSARS-CoV-2Ecological embeddednessFood provisioningFood supply chainForaging theoryMinimum viable ecosystemSustainable development

Identifiers

PMID40533718
PMCPMC12569316

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.