ArticleScientific data2026
Disaster Storylines and Knowledge Graphs from Global News with Large Language Models and Retrieval-Augmented Generation.
Article in Scientific data, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present a dataset of over 3,000 global disaster events from 2014 to 2024, derived from the Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT). Events are extracted from news using a pipeline combining Large Language Models (LLMs) and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) for semantic extraction. The corpus is the Europe Media Monitor (EMM), aggregating content from millions of news outlets. For each event, structured storylines are automatically generated, summarizing hazard characteristics, drivers, impacts, and responses, and transformed into knowledge graphs. This enables analysis of relationships, inter-hazard dynamics, and human-environment interactions often missed in traditional records. A small subset of knowledge graphs was evaluated by domain experts in a workshop, while a larger sample of extracted triplets was independently assessed to quantify precision and inter-annotator agreement. The dataset supports retrospective analysis and multi-hazard risk assessment, complementing resources like the Hazard Information Profiles (HIPs). All data, code, and workflows are openly available, with an interactive dashboard for exploration. This resource advances data-driven approaches to disaster scenario modeling, impact analysis, and decision support in disaster risk management.
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.