ArticleDisasters2026
Contemporary disasters may not kill more women than men: an empirical inquiry into sex-differentiated fatalities in the twenty-first century.
Article in Disasters, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the claim that women are disproportionately more likely to die in disasters by reviewing existing data sources and compiling new datasets on sex-differentiated disaster fatalities in the twenty-first century. The analysis is structured by disaster type, covering geophysical, meteorological, climatological, hydrological, and biological hazards, as well as broader national-level patterns based on global databases. It examines high-impact events across these disaster types and validates sex-disaggregated fatality patterns by integrating and assessing multiple data sources and demographic proxies. The findings do not support the widely cited claim of consistently higher female mortality. Instead, sex-disaggregated data remain very limited, and the evidence is largely inconclusive, except for biological disasters where male fatalities are consistently higher. Rather than assuming disproportionate effects in advance, sex-specific patterns should be assessed empirically. The study recommends mandatory, systematic reporting of gender-disaggregated fatalities and greater attention to differences in gender-based vulnerabilities across disaster types and contexts.
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.