School disaster planning for children with disabilities a critical review of the literature
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human systems have to adapt to climate change and the natural disasters predicted to increase in frequency as a result. These disasters have both direct and indirect health effects. Certain groups, the poor, the elderly, children and those with disabilities are set to be more seriously impacted by disasters because of their greater inherent vulnerability. Adaptation to the health impacts of disasters requires the cooperation and input from all sectors of government and civil society, including schools. This critical literature review examined the body of peer reviewed literature published in English addressing school disaster planning policies with a particular focus on children with disabilities. Results show that children and youth with disabilities are especially vulnerable to disasters because of socioeconomic and health factors inherent to disabilities. While schools in the U.S. have policies to deal with disasters, these policies are neither comprehensive nor inclusive. The empirical evidence base from which they are developed is severely limited. No publications were identified that represent the current disaster planning of schools in countries like Australia, the UK or Canada. Recommendations for future research are outlined to bridge knowledge gaps and help establish appropriate and inclusive school disaster policies for children with disabilities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it