Introduction: Recent years have witnessed community disaster resilience becoming one of the most heavily supported and advocated approach to disaster risk management. However, its application has been influenced by the lack of assessment tools. This study reviews studies conducted using the resilience concept and examines the tools, models, and methods adopted. It examines the domains, indicators, and indices have been considered in the tools. It provides a critical analysis of the assessment tools available for evaluating community disaster resilience (CDR). Methods: We investigated international electronic databases including Scopus, MEDLINE through PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), and Google Scholar with no limitation on date, and type of articles. The search terms and strategy were as follow: (Disaster* OR Emergenc*) AND (Resilience OR Resilient OR Resiliency) that were applied for titles, abstracts and keywords. Extracted data were analyzed in terms of studied hazards, types of methodology, domains, and indicators of CDR assessment. Results: Of 675 publications initially identified, the final analysis was conducted on 17 full text articles. These studies presented ten models, tools, or indices for CDR assessment. These evinced a diverse set of models with regard to the domains, indicators and the kind of hazard described. Considerable inter dependency between and among domains and indicators also emerged from this analysis. Conclusion: The disparity between the articles using the resilience concept and those that offer some approach to measurement (675 vs. 17) indicates the conceptual and measurement complexity in CDR and the fact that the concept may be being used without regard to how CDR should be operationalized and assessed. Of those that have attempted to assess CDR, the level of conceptual diversity indicates limited agreement about how to operationalize the concept. As a way forward we summarize the models identified in the literature and suggest that, as a starting point for the systematic operationalization of CDR, that existing indicators of community disaster resilience be classified in five domains. These are social, economic, institutional, physical and natural domains. A need to use appropriate and effective methods to quantify and weigh them with regard to their relative contributions to resilience is identified, as is a need to consider how these levels interrelate to influence resilience. Although assessment of disaster resilience especially at the community level will inform disaster risk reduction strategies, attempts to systematically do so are in preliminary phases. Further empirical investigation is needed to develop a operational and measurable CDR model.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread rapidly worldwide and led to the deaths of thousands of people. To date, there is not any vaccine or specific antiviral medicine that can prevent or treat this virus. This caused panic among people who try their best to prevent being infected. In Iran, methanol poisoning was reported and led to the death of hundreds of people in several provinces. The incident occurred after a rumor circulated in the country that drinking alcohol (ethanol) can cure or prevent being infected by COVID-19.

No abstract

Background: Hospitals play a vital role in disaster stricken regions. The resilient hospitals will be able to provide essential services to affected people and it can mitigate the risk of injuries during and after disasters. This study aimed to obtain the indicators required for the evaluation of hospital resilience. Methods: This systematic review was conducted in 2018. Through this systematic review, international electronic databases were investigated for the research studies published in English. The exclusion and inclusion criteria were determined to extract the hospital resilience indicators. These indicators will be used in order to develop a model to keep the system performance at an acceptable level during disasters. Results: Out of 1794 research studies published until September 2018, 89 articles and guidelines with full text were surveyed. Thirty-two articles and guidelines were then selected and analyzed to collect the indicators related to hospital disaster resilience (HDR). The domains and the indicators were extracted from these selected research studies. The authors collected and categorized them into three domains and twenty seven subdomains. The three domains included constructive, infrastructural, and administrative resilience. The relevant indicators were designed for each subdomain to assess HDR. Conclusion: Since diverse indicators affect hospital resilience, other studies should be conducted to propose some models or tools to quantify the hospital resilience in different countries and scopes with an all hazards approach.

Background A major destructive earthquake is predicted to shake the Tehran city in the near future. To mitigate the damage from such earthquakes, it is necessary to assess the preparedness of people and find the related risk factors. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in Tehran city among people aged 15 years or older in 2009. 1195 of Tehran's residents were interviewed using a questionnaire. Pearson chi-square test and binary logistic regression were used in order to evaluate the factors associated with preparedness against an earthquake. Results The analysis showed that 1076 (90.0%), 1160 (97.1%), and 490 (41.0%) of the participants achieved half of the possible scores for the knowledge, attitude, and practice components, respectively. Furthermore, in multivariate analysis low knowledge (p<0.001), having a high-school (p=0.033) or lower education (p<0.001) and living in Northern high-risk regions (p<0.001) of the Tehran were identified as risk factors for taking precautionary measures against earthquake. For low knowledge, lack of previous experience (p<0.001), and working as labor, businessman, employee (p=0.001) or being housewife (p=0.002) were related risk factors. In addition, people in the Southern high risk regions were significantly more knowledgeable (OR=0.618 compared to people in low risk regions) about earthquakes. Conclusions It is suggested that preparedness programs should target people with lower educational level and people in high risk regions especially the Northern districts of the city and aim at increasing public knowledge about earthquakes. Address for correspondence: Ali Ardalan, No. 78, Italia Ave, Department of Disaster Public Health, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Email: aardalan@gmail.com or aardalan@tums.ac.ir Citation: Ostad Taghizadeh A, Hosseini M, Navidi I, Mahaki AA, Ammari H, Ardalan A. Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of Tehran’s Inhabitants for an Earthquake and Related Determinants. PLOS Currents Disasters. 2012 Aug 6