Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T22:35:08.021Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part I: An Overview

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2015

Marvin L. Birnbaum ,
Elaine K. Daily ,
Ann P. O’Rourke  and
Alessandro Loretti
Marvin L. Birnbaum*
Affiliation:
Emeritus Professor of Medicine and Physiology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WisconsinUSA; Emeritus Editor-in-Chief, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine
Elaine K. Daily
Affiliation:
Nursing Section Editor, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine; Executive Secretary, World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine, Madison, WisconsinUSA
Ann P. O’Rourke
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WisconsinUSA
Alessandro Loretti
Affiliation:
Retired, World Health Organization; Consultant, World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine, Adelaid, South Australia, Australia
*
Correspondence: Marvin L. Birnbaum, MD, PhD Suite 407 610 N. Whitney Way Madison, WI 53705 USA E-mail: mbirnbaum@wadem.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The ultimate goals of conducting disaster research are to obtain information to: (1) decrease risks that a hazard will produce a disaster; (2) decrease the mortality associated with disasters; (3) decrease the morbidity associated with disasters; and (4) enhance recovery of the affected community. And decrease the risks that a hazard will produce a disaster. Two principal, but inter-related, branches of disaster research are: (1) Epidemiological; and (2) Interventional. Epidemiological research explores the relationships and occurrences that comprise a disaster from a particular event. Interventional research involves evaluations of interventions, whether they are directed at relief, recovery, hazard mitigation, capacity building, or performance. In response to the need for the discipline of Disaster Health to build its science on data that are generalizeable and comparable, a Disaster Logic Model (DLM) and a set of five Frameworks have been developed to structure the information and research of the health aspects of disasters. These Frameworks consist of the: (1) Conceptual; (2) Temporal; (3) Societal; (4) Relief/Recovery; and (5) Risk-Reduction Frameworks. The Frameworks provide a standardized format for studying and comparing the epidemiology of disasters, and with the addition of the DLM, for evaluating the interventions (responses) provided prior to, during, and following a disaster, especially as they relate to the health status of the people affected by, or at-risk for, a disaster. Critical to all five Frameworks is the inclusion of standardized definitions of the terms. The Conceptual Framework describes the progression of a hazard that becomes an event, which causes structural damage, which, in turn, results in compromised, decreased, or losses of function(s) (functional damage) that, in turn, produce needs that lead to an emergency or a disaster. The Framework incorporates a cascade of risks that lead from the presence of a hazard to the development of a disaster. Risk is the likelihood that each of the steps leading from a hazard to a disaster will take place, as well as the probabilities of consequences of each of the elements in the Conceptual Framework. The Temporal Framework describes this chronological progression as phases in order of their appearance in time; some may occur concurrently. In order to study and compare the effects of an event on the complex amalgam that constitutes a community, the essential functions of a community have been deconstructed into 13 Societal Systems that comprise the Societal Framework. These diverse, but inter-related, Societal Systems interface with each other through a 14th System, Coordination and Control. The DLM can be used to identify the effects, costs, outcomes, and impacts of any intervention. Both the Relief/Recovery and Risk-Reduction Frameworks are based on the DLM. The Relief/Recovery Framework provides the structure necessary to systematically evaluate the processes involved in interventions provided during the Relief or Recovery phases of a disaster. The Risk-Reduction Framework details the processes involved in interventions aimed at mitigating the risk that a hazard will produce a destructive event, and/or in capacity building to augment the resilience of a community to the consequences of such an event.

BirnbaumML, DailyEK, O’RourkeAP, LorettiA. Research and Evaluations of the Health Aspects of Disasters, Part I: An Overview. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2015;30(5):512–522.

Keywords

disasterDisaster Logic Modelframeworksresearchrisk
Type
Special Reports
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 30 , Issue 5 , October 2015 , pp. 512 - 522
Copyright
© World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

a

Task Force for Quality Control of Disaster Medicine, World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine, Nordic Society for Disaster Medicine. Health Disaster Management Guidelines for Evaluation and Research in the Utstein Style. Sundnes KO, Birnbaum ML (eds). Prehosp Disaster Med. 2003;17(Supplement 3).

References

1. Guralnik, DB, Friend, JH, (eds). Definition of “research.” Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language. Cleveland, Ohio: World Publishing Co.; 1968: 1237.Google Scholar
2. Emergency and Humanitarian Action, World Health Organization, Regional Office for South-East Asia. Tsunami 2004: A Comprehensive Analysis Au: Birnbaum ML, Kohl PA, Ofrin R, Daily EK. New Delhi, India: SEARO; 2013.Google Scholar
3. Task Force for Quality Control of Disaster Medicine, World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine, Nordic Society for Disaster Medicine. Health Disaster Management Guidelines for Evaluation and Research in the Utstein Style. Sundnes KO, Birnbaum ML, (eds). Prehosp Disaster Med. 2003;17(Supplement 3).Google Scholar
4. Birnbaum, ML, O’Rourke, AP, Daily, EK. Research and evaluation in the health aspects of disasters, part VI: interventional research and the Disaster Logic Model. Prehosp Disaster Med. In Press.Google Scholar
5. Birnbaum, ML, O’Rourke, AP, Daily, EK, Loretti, A. Research and evaluation in the health aspects of disasters, part VII: the Relief/Recovery Framework. Prehosp Disaster Med. In Press.Google Scholar
6. Birnbaum, ML, O’Rourke, AP, Daily, EK. Research and evaluations of the health aspects of disasters, part IX: the Risk-Reduction Framework. Prehosp Disaster Med. In Press.Google Scholar
7. Birnbaum, ML, O’Rourke, A, Daily, EK. Research and evaluations of the health aspects of disasters, part IV: framework for societal structures: the Societal Systems. Prehosp Disaster Med. In Press.Google Scholar
8. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction. Resilient People, Resilient Planet. Chair’s Summary, Fourth Session of the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva, Switzerland: May 21-23, 2013. http://www.ifrc.org/docs/IDRL/33306_finalchairssummaryoffourthsessionof.pdf. Accessed November 1, 2013.Google Scholar
9. Pickett, JP, (ed). Definition of “resilience.” The American Heritage College Dictionary, 4th ed. Boston, New York USA: Houghton Mifflin Company; 2002: 1183.Google Scholar
10. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR). www.adrc.asia/publications/terminology/top.htm%P) A: 5/29. Published December 3, 2003. Accessed November 19, 2013.Google Scholar
11. Business Dictionary.com. Definition of “vulnerability.” www.Businessdictionary.com/definition/vulnerability.html) A: 4/9a. Accessed November 19, 2013.Google Scholar
12. Birnbaum, ML, O’Rourke, A, Daily, EK. Research and evaluation in the health aspects of disasters, part III: the Temporal Framework. Prehosp Disaster Med. In Press.Google Scholar
13. United Nations Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC). Transformative Agenda. http://www.humanitarianinfo.org/iasc/. Accessed February 21, 2013.Google Scholar
14. Thompson, D, (ed). Definition of “epidemiology.” The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English. 9th ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1995: 475.Google Scholar
15. Pickett, JP, (ed). Definition of “epidemiology.” The American Heritage College Dictionary. 4th ed. Boston, New York USA: Houghton. Mifflin Company; 2002: 520.Google Scholar
16. Guralnik, DB, Friend, JH, (eds). Definition of “evaluate.” Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language. Cleveland, Ohio, USA: The World Publishing Co.; 1968: 401.Google Scholar
17. Adibhattia, S, Dudek, O, Ramsel, J, Birnbaum, M. Classification of studies in disaster research. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2005;20(Suppl2):s111.Google Scholar
18. Smith, E, Wasiak, J, Sen, A, Archer, F, Burkle, FM Jr. Three decades of disasters: a review of disaster-specific literature from 1977-2009. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2009;24(4):306-311.Google Scholar
19. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED). http://www.cred.be/. Accessed August 2, 2011.Google Scholar
20. Birnbaum, ML, O’Rourke, AP, Daily, EK. Research and evaluation in the health aspects of disasters, part II: the Disaster Health Conceptual Framework revisited. Prehosp Disaster Med. In Press.Google Scholar
21. Kulling, P, Birnbaum, M, Murray, V, Rockenschaub, G. Guidelines for reports on health crises and critical health events. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2010;25(4):378-382.Google Scholar
22. Colleges of Education, College of Arts & Sciences [Education Programs], Colorado State University: Unit Assessment System. http://www.csu.edu/collegeofeducation/ncate/NCATE_UnitAssessmentSystemLogicModel.pdf. Accessed August 1, 2011.Google Scholar
23. Funnell, S. Developing and Using a Program Theory Matrix for Program Evaluation and Performance Monitoring. In: Rogers P, Hacsi T, Petrosino A, Huebner T, (eds). Program Theory in Evaluation: Challenges and Opportunities, New Directions for Evaluation No. 87. Hoboken, New Jersey: Jossey-Bass, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2000: 91-101.Google Scholar
24. Taylor-Powell, E. Building Capacity in Evaluating Outcomes. Madison, Wisconsin USA: University of Wisconsin-Extension, Cooperative Extension, Program Development and Evaluation; 2008; http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande. Accessed April 9, 2013.Google Scholar
25. University of Wisconsin-Extension, Cooperative Extension Program Development and Evaluation. Developing a Logic Model: Teaching and Training Guide. 2008. http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/evaluation/pdf/lmguidecomplete.pdf. Accessed March 26, 2013.Google Scholar
26. W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Using Logic Models to Bring Together Planning, Evaluation, and Action. A Logic Model Development Guide. http://www.wkkf.org/knowledge-center/resources/2006/02/wk-kellogg-foundation-logic-model-development-guide.aspx. Accessed February 26, 2013.Google Scholar
27. Chambers, RG. Applied Production Analysis: A Dual Approach. Cambridge University Press; New York; 1989.Google Scholar