Assessing Disaster Preparedness Among Select Children’s Summer Camps in the United States and Canada
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: Children's summer camps are at risk for multiple pediatric casualties during a disaster. The degree to which summer camps have instituted disaster preparedness is unknown. We assessed disaster preparedness among selected camps nationally for a range of disasters. METHODS: We partnered with a national, web-based electronic health records system to send camp leadership of 315 camp organizations a 14-question online survey of disaster preparedness. One response from each camp was selected in the following order of importance: owner, director, physician, nurse, medical technician, office staff, and other. The results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 181 camps responses were received, 169 of which were complete. Camp types were overnight (60%), day (21%), special/medical needs (14%), and other (5%). Survey respondents were directors (52%), nurses (14%), office staff (10%), physicians (5%), owners (5%), emergency medical technicians (2%), and other (12%). Almost 18% of camps were located >20 mi from a major medical center, and 36% were >5 mi from police/fire departments. Many camps were missing emergency supplies: car/booster seats for evacuation (68%), shelter (35%), vehicles for evacuation (26%), quarantine isolation areas (21%), or emergency supplies of extra water (20%) or food (17%). Plans were unavailable for the following: power outages (23%); lockdowns (15%); illness outbreaks (15%); tornadoes (11%); evacuation for fire, flood, or chemical spill (9%); and other severe weather (8%). Many camps did not have online emergency plans (53%), plans for children with special/medical needs (38%), methods to rapidly communicate information to parents (25%), or methods to identify children for evacuation/reunification with parents (40%). Respondents reported that staff participation in disaster drills varied for weather (58%), evacuations (46%), and lockdowns (36%). The majority (75%) of respondents had not collaborated with medical organizations for planning. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of camps were missing critical components of disaster planning. Future interventions must focus on developing summer camp-specific disaster plans, increasing partnerships, and reassessing national disaster plans to include summer camp settings.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle