Assessing the national capacity for disaster research response (DR2) within the NIEHS Environmental Health Sciences Core Centers.
Clicks: 295
ID: 24195
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
70.4
/100
295 views
238 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #13 of 27 articles by views in Environmental health : a global access science source
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Disaster research response (DR2) is necessary to answer scientific questions about the environmental health impacts of disasters and the effectiveness of response and recovery strategies. This research explores the preparedness and capacity of National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) P30 Core Centers (CCs) to conduct DR2 and engage with communities in the context of disasters.In early 2018, we conducted an online survey of CC Directors (n = 16, 69.5% response rate) to identify their DR2 relevant scientific assets, capabilities, and activities. Summary statistics were calculated. We also conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 16 (69.5%) CC Community Engagement Core directors to identify facilitators and barriers of DR2 community engagement. Interview notes were coded and thematically analyzed.Survey: While 56% of responding CCs reported prior participation in DR2 and preparedness to repurpose funding to support DR2, less than one third reported development of a disaster-specific data collection protocol, deployment plan, or concept of operations plan, participation in an exercise to test DR2 capacity, development of academic partnerships to conduct DR2, development of a process for fast-tracking institutional review board approvals for DR2, or maintenance of formal agreements with state, local, or community-based partner(s). A number of CCs reported developing or considering developing capacity in these areas. Barriers to, and tools and resources to enhance, CC engagement in DR2 were identified. Interviews: Four key components for community engaged DR2 were identified: pre-existing community relationships, responsive research that benefits communities, coordination among researchers, and coordination with community response partners. Several roles for, benefits of, and barriers to Community Engagement Rapid Response Teams (CERRT) were described.CCs have significant scientific assets and community partnerships that can be leveraged for DR2; however, additional planning is necessary to ensure that these scientific assets and community partnerships are leveraged when disasters strike.
| Reference Key |
errett2019assessingenvironmental
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Errett, Nicole A;Haynes, Erin N;Wyland, Nancy;Everhart, Ali;Pendergrast, Claire;Parker, Edith A; |
| Journal | Environmental health : a global access science source |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
10.1186/s12940-019-0498-y
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.