Observational studyBMC emergency medicine2025
Assessing health risks and preparedness strategies in mass-gathering religious events: a retrospective observational study.
Observational study in BMC emergency 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
backgroundMazu pilgrimages are among the largest moving religious events worldwide, involving ceremonies and processions spanning over 300 km in 8-10 days. The massive crowds pose unique public health challenges. This study aimed to assess the health risks and contributing factors of these events to help authorities and local healthcare services better anticipate, prepare for, and mitigate potential health issues during the pilgrimage.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational study using patient data from the Emergency Medical Resources Management System of Taiwan's Ministry of Health and Welfare from 1 January 2018 to 31 October 2024. Records included demographics, means of transport, Taiwan Triage and Acuity Scale (TTAS) level, diagnosis, and disposition for each emergency department (ED) visit related to the two Mazu pilgrimages. Individual ED visits were aggregated into daily counts to estimate daily health impacts. The primary outcome was the daily total number of pilgrimage-related ED visits; secondary outcomes were daily counts for specific diagnoses. Multivariable linear regression was used to examine associations between environmental and event-related factors-including whether the day was the start or end day of the pilgrimage (S-or-E-day), daily walking distance, highest temperature, and relative humidity-and the log-transformed daily ED visit and diagnosis-specific counts.
resultsA total of 1,637 patients visited the ED during Mazu pilgrimages in the study period. Half arrived by ambulance, and 10.8% were triaged as TTAS I/II. Most patients (89.7%) were discharged without admission; only 8.1% were admitted to general wards. Trauma-related diagnoses were the most common (53.7%), with soft tissue injuries (28.1%) and heat emergencies (16.1%) being the most frequent trauma and non-trauma conditions, respectively. The S-or-E-day variable was significantly associated with the daily number of ED visits, trauma, head injuries, orthopaedic injuries, and heat emergencies. Walking distance was linked to ED visits and trauma cases, while highest temperature was linked to heat emergencies.
conclusionsDuring Mazu pilgrimages in Taiwan, most patients visiting the ED presented with mild conditions, predominantly minor trauma-related injuries. By monitoring walking distance and temperature, healthcare providers can better anticipate and prepare for cases related to trauma and heat emergencies. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.