Where is the evidence for emergency planning: a scoping reviewReport as inadecuate




Where is the evidence for emergency planning: a scoping review - Download this document for free, or read online. Document in PDF available to download.

BMC Public Health

, 12:542

First Online: 23 July 2012Received: 20 March 2012Accepted: 23 July 2012DOI: 10.1186-1471-2458-12-542

Cite this article as: Challen, K., Lee, A.C., Booth, A. et al. BMC Public Health 2012 12: 542. doi:10.1186-1471-2458-12-542

Abstract

BackgroundRecent terrorist attacks and natural disasters have led to an increased awareness of the importance of emergency planning. However, the extent to which emergency planners can access or use evidence remains unclear. The aim of this study was to identify, analyse and assess the location, source and quality of emergency planning publications in the academic and UK grey literature.

MethodsWe conducted a scoping review, using as data sources for academic literature Embase, Medline, Medline in Process, Psychinfo, Biosis, Science Citation Index, Cinahl, Cochrane library and Clinicaltrials.gov. For grey literature identification we used databases at the Health Protection Agency, NHS Evidence, British Association of Immediate Care Schemes, Emergency Planning College and the Health and Safety Executive, and the websites of UK Department of Health Emergency Planning Division and UK Resilience.

Aggregative synthesis was used to analyse papers and documents against a framework based on a modified FEMA Emergency Planning cycle.

ResultsOf 2736 titles identified from the academic literature, 1603 were relevant. 45% were from North America, 27% were commentaries or editorials and 22% were event reports.

Of 192 documents from the grey literature, 97 were relevant. 76% of these were event reports.

The majority of documents addressed emergency planning and response. Very few documents related to hazard analysis, mitigation or capability assessment.

ConclusionsAlthough a large body of literature exists, its validity and generalisability is unclear There is little evidence that this potential evidence base has been exploited through synthesis to inform policy and practice. The type and structure of evidence that would be of most value of emergency planners and policymakers has yet to be identified.

KeywordsEmergency planning Disaster Major incident Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article doi:10.1186-1471-2458-12-542 contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Download fulltext PDF



Author: Kirsty Challen - Andrew CK Lee - Andrew Booth - Paolo Gardois - Helen Buckley Woods - Steve W Goodacre

Source: https://link.springer.com/







Related documents