Authors
- . Sadegh Ahmadi Mazhin 1
- . Mehrdad Farrokhi 2
- . Mehdi Noroozi 3
- . Juliet Roudini 2
- . Seyed Ali Hosseini 4
- . Mohammad Esmaeil Motlagh 5
- . Pirhossein Kolivand 6
- . Hamidreza Khankeh 7
1 Health in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran, Department of Nursing and Emergency, Dezful University of Medical Sciences, Dezful, Iran,
2 Health in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3 Social Determinants of Health Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4 Department of Occupational Therapy, Social Determinants of Health Research Centre, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
5 Department of Pediatrics, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
6 Shefa Neuroscience Research Center, Khatamol Anbia Hospital. Tehran, Iran
7 Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden Health in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran,
Abstract
Nowadays, disaster databases have become a valuable tool for disaster risk management and
health promotion and serve various purposes. The purpose of this study is to provide a systematic
review of disaster databases in the world and to identify the objectives, information sources, criteria,
and variables of disaster data registration in the world’s reputable databases. To conduct review,
all English‑language articles published without a time limit until the end of September 2020 were
extracted from the databases of Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Science
Direct, Google Scholar, and Embase. Necessary information in the papers including study time, type
of disasters, related databases, dimensions and indicators of global and regional databases were
extracted by using a researcher‑made questionnaire. A total of 22 studies have been reviewed to
identify the dimensions and indicators of disaster databases worldwide. The main focus was on global
and regional databases, mostly used at the level of scientific societies and disaster experts. After
explanation, researchers highlighted each of the disaster databases, along with the main differences
available among the existing databases. Some databases have well‑defined data collection methods.
Their knowledge is high quality and they can be used to create and improve a disaster database at
other levels. Disaster database limitations include risk bias, time bias, accounting bias, threshold
bias, and geographical bias. To support the right decisions to reduce disaster risk, it is necessary
to complement existing global, regional, and national databases. Countries need to take action to
set up national databases.
Keywords
Imamura F, et al. Vulnerability characteristics of tsunamis in
Indonesia: Analysis of the global centre for disaster statistics
database. J Disaster Res 2018;13:1039‑48.
2. Ono Y. National Disaster Databases: An Essential Foundation
for Disaster Risk Reduction Policies and Disaster‑Related
Sustainable Development Goals and Targets. Available from:
https://tohoku.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/national‑
disaster‑databases‑an‑essential‑foundation-for‑disaster‑. [Last
accessed on 2020 Sep 29].
3. Poursadeghiyan M, Omidi L, Hami M, Raei M, Biglari F.
Epidemiology of fatal and non‑fatal industrial accidents in
Khorasan Razavi Province, Iran. Int J Trop Med 2016;11:6. Available
from: https://acgih.ir/wp‑content/uploads/2018/09/8.
pdf. [Last accessed on 2020 Nov 24].
4. Khammar A, Hosseinighosheh S, Abdolshahi A, Hosseini
Ahagh M, Poursadeqiyan M. Forecast of the future trend of
accidents in an electricity distribution company of Iran: A time
series analysis. Iran J Public Health 2019;48:2315‑7.
5. Shi P, Wang J, Yang M, Chen J, PanY, Wang P, et al. Understanding
of natural disaster database design and compilation of digital atlas
of natural disasters in China. Ann GIS 2000;6:153‑8.
6. Zhao L, Wu JJ. Design and development of database for disaster
risk governance. Nat Disasters 2008;17:44‑8.
7. Grasso VF, Dilley M. Comparative Review of Country‑Level and
Regional Disaster Loss and Damage Databases; 2013.
8. Kron W, Steuer M, Löw P, Wirtz A. How to deal properly with
a natural catastrophe database‑Analysis of flood losses. Nat
Hazards Earth Syst Sci 2012;12:535‑50.
9. Aminizadeh M, Farrokhi M, Ebadi A, Masoumi GR, Kolivand P,
Khankeh HR. Hospital management preparedness tools in
biological events: A scoping review. J Educ Health Promot
2019;8:234.
10. Gall M, Borden KA, Cutter SL. Six Fallacies of Natural Hazards
Loss Data. Bull Am Meteorol Soc. 2009;799-809(June).
11. Wirtz A, Kron W, Löw P, Steuer M. The need for data: Natural
disasters and the challenges of database management. Nat
Hazards 2014;70:135‑57.
12. Vos F. WORKING PAPER Work Package 3 Review of Disaster
Databases collecting Human Impact Data in Europe. 2012.
13. MoherD, Shamseer L, ClarkeM, GhersiD, LiberatiA, PetticrewM,
et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and
Meta‑Analysis Protocols (PRISMA‑P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev
2015;4:1. Available from: https://systematicreviewsjournal.
biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2046‑4053‑4‑1. [Last
accessed on 2020 Sep 12].
14. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC,
Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement:
Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg
2014;12:1495‑9. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S174391911400212X. [Last accessed on 2020
Sep 12].
15. Mazhin S, Khankeh H, Farrokhi M, Aminizadeh M,
Poursadeqiyan M. Migration health crisis associated with climate
change: A systematic review. J Educ Health Promot 2020;9:97.
16. Bazyar J, Farrokhi M, Salari A, Khankeh HR. The Principles
of Triage in Emergencies and Disasters: A Systematic Review.
Prehosp Disaster Med 2020;35(3):305-13.
17. El Hadri H, Mirza D, Rabaud I. Natural disasters and countries’
exports: New insights from a new (and an old) database. World
Econ 2019;42:2668‑83. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.
wiley.com/doi/abs/100.1111/twec. 12833. [Last accessed on
2020 Aug 16].
18. Ries M, Zielonka M, Ries N, Breil T, Garbade S, Mechler K.
Disasters in Germany and France: An analysis of the emergency
events database from a pediatric perspective. Disaster Med Public
Health Prep 2019;13:958‑65.
19. Napolitano E, Marchesini I, Salvati P, Donnini M, Bianchi C,
Guzzetti F. LAND‑deFeND – An innovative database structure for
landslides and floods and their consequences. J Environ Manage.
2017/11/28. 2018 Feb;207:203-18.
20. Koç G, Thieken AH. The relevance of flood hazards and impacts
in Turkey: What can be learned from different disaster loss
databases? Nat Hazards 2018;91:375‑408. Available from: https://
link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11069‑017‑3134‑6. [Last
accessed on 2020 Aug 16].
21. Moriyama K, Sasaki D, Ono Y. Comparison of global
databases for disaster loss and damage data. Disaster Res
2018;13:1007‑14. Available from: https://www.fujipress.jp/jdr/
dr/dsstr001300061007. [Last accessed on 2020 Aug 16].
22. Brown SK, Jenkins SF, Sparks RSJ, Odbert H, Auker MR. Volcanic
fatalities database: Analysis of volcanic threat with distance and
victim classification. Appl Volcanol 2017;6:15.
23. Stahl K, Kohn I, Blauhut V, Urquijo J, De Stefano L, Acácio V,
et al. Impacts of European drought events: Insights from an
international database of text‑based reports. Nat Hazards Earth
Syst Sci 2016;16:801‑19.
24. Soto A. Deriving information on disasters caused by natural
hazards from limited data: A Guatemalan case study. Nat Hazards
2015;75:71‑94.
25. GallM. The suitability of disaster loss databases to measure loss and
damage from climate change. Int J Glob Warm 2015;8:170. Available fr
om: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id
=71966. [Last accessed on 2020 Aug 16].
26. Huggel C, Raissig A, Rohrer M, Romero G, Diaz A, Salzmann N.
How useful and reliable are disaster databases in the context of
climate and global change? A comparative case study analysis in
Peru. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 2015;15:475‑85.
27. Zêzere JL, Pereira S, Tavares AO, Bateira C, TrigoRM, Quaresma I,
et al. DISASTER: A GIS database on hydro‑geomorphologic
disasters in Portugal. Nat Hazards 2014;72:503‑32. Available
from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069‑013‑1018‑y. [Last
accessed on 2020 Aug 16].
28. Santos PP dos, Tavares AO, Zêzere JL. Risk analysis for local
management from hydro‑geomorphologic disaster databases.
Environ Sci Policy 2014;40:85‑100.
29. Mohleji S. Gaining from Losses: Using Disaster Loss Data as a Tool
for Appraising Natural Disaster Policy. University of Colorado;
2011.
30. López‑Peláez J, Pigeon P. Co‑evolution between structural
mitigation measures and urbanization in France and Colombia:
A comparative analysis of disaster risk management policies
based on disaster databases. Habitat Int 201135:573‑81.
Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/
S019739751100021X. [Last accessed on 2020 Aug 16].
31. Marulanda MC, Cardona OD, Barbat AH. Revealing the
socioeconomic impact of small disasters in Colombia using the
DesInventar database. Disasters 2010;34:552–70.
32. United Nations Development Programme. Risk Knowledge
Fundamentals: Guidelines and Lessons for Establishing and
Institutionalizing Disaster Loss Database. Bangkok; 2009.
33. Witham CS. Volcanic disasters and incidents: A new database.
J Volcanol Geotherm Res 2005;148:191‑233.
34. Sapir DG, Misson C. The development of a database on disasters.
Disasters 1992;16:74‑80. Available from: http://doi.wiley.
com/10.1111/j. 1467‑7717.1992.tb00378.x. [Last accessed on 2020
Aug 16].
35. Nakhaei M, Bahrampouri S. Editorial: A study of disaster
databases. Heal Emerg Disasters Q 2016;1:63‑4.
36. Poursadeqiyan M, Arefi M. Health, safety, and environmental
status of Iranian school: A systematic review. J Educ Health
Promot. 2020;9(1):297.
)