↓ Skip to main content

Prepared for what? addressing the disaster readiness gap beyond preparedness for survival

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prepared for what? addressing the disaster readiness gap beyond preparedness for survival
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2440-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monica E. Gowan, Jeff A. Sloan, Ray C. Kirk

Abstract

Conventional disaster preparedness messaging focuses largely on promoting survival actions and communications planning for the immediate post-disaster period. While such preparedness is vital, we have long-observed a gap in preventive medicine and disaster planning for building personal resilience - preventatively - to persevere through prolonged recovery timeframes. There are many helpful attitudes and behaviors that people can develop to increase their readiness and capacity for drastic life changes, encompassing not only health-protective preparedness actions but health-promoting attitudes for "minding the risk" and "practicing resilience" as well. For instance, quality of life assessments and well-being interventions are widely-known for the clinically significant improvements they can produce in patient-reported outcomes. Similarly, health promotion interventions are implemented preventatively when a risk is identified yet a disease is not present, and can provide health benefits throughout people's lives, regardless of the type of adversities they eventually encounter (medical, environmental, or other). We argue there is an overlooked opportunity to leverage well-being theories and methods from clinical settings and public health practice for the purpose of preventatively boosting disaster readiness and bolstering capacity for long-term resilience. We also highlight our previously-published research indicating a role for integrating personal meaning into preparedness messages. This is an opportune time for applying well-being concepts and practices as tools for developing disaster readiness, as risk awareness grows through real-time tracking of hazardous events via social media. For example, two sudden-onset disasters occurred within ten days of each other in 2014 and caught worldwide attention for their extreme hazards, despite dramatic differences in scale. The 22 March 2014 landslide tragedy in Washington State, USA, and the 1 April 2014 Chilean earthquake and Pacific-wide tsunami alerts brought home how persistently vulnerable we all are, and how developing intrinsic personal readiness for scientifically-known risks before disaster unfolds is essential policy. Gap programming that addresses personal readiness challenges in prevention timeframes could save lives and costs. We contend that bridging this readiness gap will prevent situations where people, communities, and systems survive the initial impact, but their resilience trajectories are vulnerable to the challenges of long-haul recovery.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ireland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Philippines 1 <1%
Grenada 1 <1%
Unknown 159 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 14%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Researcher 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 4%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 46 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 28 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 11 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 7%
Psychology 8 5%
Other 34 21%
Unknown 53 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 March 2020.
All research outputs
#7,001,266
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,202
of 15,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,395
of 390,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#104
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,044 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 234 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.