MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389616922 · doi:10.1177/08404704231219996

Healthcare and successive natural disasters: Lessons still to be learned

2023· article· en· W4389616922 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michel Sauve, Jared Bly, Louis Hugo Francescutti

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsCumulative Environmental Management AssociationAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResilience (materials science)Health carePreparednessNatural disasterGovernment (linguistics)Emergency managementDisaster recoveryBusinessAdaptation (eye)Disaster planningFlood mythEnvironmental planningPublic relationsPoison controlPolitical scienceSuicide preventionMedical emergencyMedicinePsychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the increasing impact of natural disasters on healthcare leadership and disaster preparedness, particularly in Fort McMurray, Alberta. It underscores the importance of building disaster resilience in healthcare, distinguishing between emergencies, disasters, and catastrophes, and advocating for a multi-dimensional resilience approach. The need for robust electronic communication channels and comprehensive family-oriented evacuation plans, considering family and pet safety, is emphasized. The protection of vulnerable patients, the importance of resilient healthcare infrastructure, and dedicated protective equipment for first responders are also discussed. The article highlights the critical role of government support in flood prevention and disaster preparedness. Through the experiences of Fort McMurray, the article demonstrates the necessity of comprehensive disaster planning and the crucial role of healthcare systems in rapid recovery and adaptation in the face of disasters. It aims to contribute to an improved understanding and strategies for managing such critical situations in the future.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.014
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.347 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management Forum→Same topicDisaster Response and Management→French-language works237,207→