Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42620755›Full record

ArticleiScience2026

The social dilemma of load shedding in Community Grids with vulnerable populations.

Zhe Gong, Bedoor Alshebli, Jimmy Chih-Hsien Peng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in iScience, 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.

Zhe GongDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Bedoor AlshebliSocial Science Division, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Jimmy Chih-Hsien PengDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In situations of emergency failures and power supply shortages, utility companies face the critical decision of load-shedding (disconnecting customers involuntarily). Determining the principles by which load-shedding can best align with both economic imperatives and social norms presents a complex challenge. Existing load-shedding protocols, largely governed by economic considerations, risk undermining principles of energy justice by disproportionately affecting individuals dependent on durable medical equipment (DME). Here, we investigate the equity implications of load-shedding in cities. Taking northern New York City as an example, we identified the systemic disadvantages faced by residential DME users during energy outages. Through modeling and public surveys of 856 U.S. residents, we show that incorporating DME-related settlement costs of loss into load-shedding optimization can better safeguard medically vulnerable households and align outage management with public preferences for prioritizing vulnerable populations. Our findings also reveal that current compensation structures inadequately capture the social harm of outages, supporting policy reforms that embed social justice into grid resilience strategies and more systematically protect at-risk populations.

Indexed as

durable medical equipmentenergy justiceload sheddingvulnerable populations

Identifiers

PMID42620755
PMCPMC13486870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.