Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41495259›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

On urban maladaptation in times of epidemics.

Mikhail Sirenko, Alexander Verbraeck, Tina Comes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Mikhail SirenkoFaculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands. m.sirenko@tudelft.nl.
Alexander VerbraeckFaculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.
Tina ComesFaculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.

Funding

EC | Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020) 101003606
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epidemics are long-lasting and transboundary crises that challenge traditional approaches. Given the complexity and interconnectedness of modern cities, interventions can lead to unintended consequences or maladaptation. Although adaptation is central to resilience, crisis management often focuses on short-term response, leaving a gap in understanding urban adaptation and maladaptation. This study examines the impacts of uniform interventions across diverse urban districts to assess this (mal)adaptive process. We use the COVID-19 pandemic in The Hague, Netherlands, as a case study, employing a large-scale agent-based model. We find that without an intervention, the high-contact city centre becomes an infection hotspot due to the transient population it attracts. Conversely, the outer residential district, with fewer amenities, experiences infections primarily among its residents. A uniform lockdown policy significantly reduces infections in the city centre by limiting mobility and social interactions, but inadvertently increases risk in the outer residential district. Using the Urban Adaptation Index (UAI), we demonstrate that these uncontextualised policies can constitute maladaptation, confirming the unintended consequences of 'one-size-fits-all' approaches. Our results underscore this need, leading us to propose an updated, equity-oriented crisis management framework that accounts for the heterogeneous nature of modern cities.

Indexed as

COVID-19EpidemicsCitiesHumansNetherlandsPandemicsQuarantineSARS-CoV-2Urban PopulationAdaptationBehaviourEpidemicMaladaptationSimulationUrban

Identifiers

PMID41495259
PMCPMC12830883

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.