MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049551074 · doi:10.2202/1948-4682.1144

A Review of Hurricane Disaster Planning for the Elderly

2011· review· en· W2049551074 on OpenAlex
David GC McCann

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Medical & Health Policy · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHurricane katrinaEmergency managementDisaster planningGerontologyMedical emergencyMedicineSuicide preventionEnvironmental planningPoison controlNatural disasterGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Frail elderly people are particularly vulnerable during hurricanes. Of the 1,330 people known to have perished along the Gulf Coast as a result of Hurricane Katrina, 71% of those in Louisiana were older than 60 years, 47% were older than 75 years, and at least 68 died in nursing homes. Unfortunately, community disaster planning frequently fails to allow for the needs of the frail elderly before, during, and after hurricanes. This paper discusses the particular vulnerabilities of the frail elderly, especially those with chronic diseases, those in residential care facilities, and those who are dialysis‐dependent. The importance of the Incident Management System (IMS) is discussed, and those who care for the frail elderly in long‐term care facilities must understand and use IMS in dealing with hurricane‐related disasters. Recommendations are made that will improve hurricane disaster planning for the frail elderly. From a policy viewpoint, it is critical that the elderly, especially those with chronic diseases, be included in disaster planning at the federal, state, and local levels to ensure that a repeat of the Hurricane Katrina debacle does not occur.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.150
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.375 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it