ArticleBMJ public health2026
Evaluating administrative compliance as a predictor of nursing home postdisaster outcomes in the USA.
Article in BMJ public health, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Determining whether compliance with the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) emergency preparedness standards for nursing homes is a protective factor that improves residents' postdisaster outcomes is vital to informed regulatory oversight. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 294 CMS-certified nursing homes exposed to Hurricane Michael (October 2018). The exposure was non-compliance with emergency preparedness (E-tag) and/or building code (K-tag) standards from the CMS Life Safety Code survey; we operationalised over 200 unique deficiencies as separate dichotomous indicator variables. We fit generalised linear models and applied elastic net regularisation to identify which regulatory deficiencies were most predictive of adverse postdisaster outcomes (30-day mortality (primary), 30-day hospitalisation and functional decline within 120 days). We selected the best fitting model for each outcome based on the lowest Bayesian Information Criterion and reported incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for retained variables. We performed 10-fold cross-validation and evaluated the predictive accuracy of the best-fitting models using root mean squared error (RMSE), compared with a null (intercept-only) model. Results: Across 294 nursing homes with 21 945 residents with an average age of 81 years, there were 697 deaths, 1316 hospitalisations and 1274 instances of functional decline in the postdisaster period. No emergency preparedness deficiency predicted adverse postdisaster outcomes. In contrast, two building code deficiencies predicted postdisaster functional decline (IRRs 1.21 and 1.51). The best-fitting models demonstrated modest improvements in predictive accuracy compared with the null model for postdisaster mortality (RMSE 1.76 vs 1.79) and functional decline (RMSE 3.35 vs 3.44), although these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusions: Measures of compliance with federal emergency-preparedness standards did not predict postdisaster mortality, hospitalisation or functional decline. These findings indicate a need to better align the measurement and oversight of nursing home emergency preparedness with the complexities of real-world disaster response.
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.