Authors
- . Sadegh Ahmadi Mazhin 1
- . Mehrdad Farrokhi 2
- . Mehdi Noroozi 3
- . Juliet Roudini 4
- . Seyed Ali Hosseini 3
- . 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, School 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 health in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, 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 Shefa Neuroscience Research Center, Khatamol Anbia Hospital, Tehran, Iran Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nowadays, emergencies and disasters are considered one of the biggest problems
in human life. To reduce the risk of emergencies and disasters, governments must develop strategies
and policies using evidence‑based methods. Disaster databases are the main source and tool for
storing and managing a wide range of data in this field. This study was conducted with the aim of
exploring the necessary criteria and components of the emergency and disasters database in Iran.
MARTIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative study was performed using content analysis in which 18
managers and experts with experience in registering, documenting, or responding to emergencies and
disasters were selected through purposive sampling. Data collection was done using semi‑structured
interviews that continued until saturation. Data were analyzed by means of qualitative content analysis
recommended by Landman and Graneheim.
RESULTS: In total, three main concepts concerning the necessary criteria and components of the
database of natural and artificial emergencies and disasters in Iran were explored. The main concepts
include information resources, information evaluation, and information management. Subconcepts
include data collection, information transfer, access to information, information validation, disaster
leveling, information registering, information storage and retrieval, information analysis, and
information dissemination.
CONCLUSION: The experience of the participants showed that there are many challenges in the
field of monitoring and gathering information about injuries and damages caused by emergencies
and disasters in the country. The knowledge obtained from this study can be used to create and
develop a database of emergencies and disasters in Iran. It will also provide insights for healthcare
policymakers and managers in future planning areas to more effectively address identified challenges
in preventing and responding to disasters at both regional and national levels.
Keywords
exports: New insights from a new (and an old) database. World
Econ 2019;42:2668‑83.
2. CRED. Disaster Year in Review 2019. CRED Crunch. 2020;(58):1–2.
3. 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. Environ Manage
2018;207:203‑18.
4. Aitsi‑Selmi A, Murray V. The Sendai framework: Disaster risk
reduction through a health lens. Bull World Health Organ
2015;93:362.
5. Suppasri A, Muhari A, Syamsidik S, Yunus R, Pakoksung K,
Imamura F, et al. Vulnerability characteristics of tsunamis in
Indonesia: Analysis of the global centre for disaster statistics
database. Disaster Res 2018;13:1039‑48.
6. Bazyar J, Pourvakhshoori N, Safarpour H, Far‑Rokhi M,
Khankeh HR, Daliri S, et al. Hospital disaster preparedness in Iran: A systematic review and meta‑analysis. Iran J Public Health
2020;49:837‑50.
7. 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.
8. UNDP. A Comparative Review of Country‑Level and Regional
Disaster Loss and Damage Databases. 2013. p. 51.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Nakhaei M, Bahrampouri S. Editorial: A Study of Disaster
Databases. Heal Emergencies Disasters. 2016;1 (2):63–4.
12. Safarpour H, Sohrabizadeh S, Malekyan L, Safi‑Keykaleh M,
Pirani D, Daliri S, Bazyar J. Suicide Death Rate after Disasters:
A Meta‑Analysis Study. Arch Suicide Res. 2020 Jul 16:1‑14.
Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/
abs/10.1080/13811118.2020.1793045. [Last accessed on 2020
Nov 28].
13. Mazhin SA, 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.
14. Bazyar J, Farrokhi M, Salari A, Khankeh HR. The principles of
triage in emergencies and disasters: A systematic review. Prehosp
Disaster Med 2020;35:305‑13.
15. Aminizadeh M, Farrokhi M, Ebadi A, Masoumi G, Kolivand P,
Khankeh H. Hospital Preparedness Challenges in Biological
Disasters: A Qualitative Study. Disaster Med Public Health
Prep [Internet]. 2020 Nov 5 [cited 2020 Dec 3];1–5. Available
from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/
S1935789320004346/type/journal_article
16. Aminizadeh M, Farrokhi M, Ebadi A, Masoumi G, Kolivand P,
Khankeh H. Hospital management preparedness tools in
biological events: A scoping review. Educ Health Promot
2019;8:234.
17. PoursadeqiyanM, BazrafshanE, ArefiM. Review of environmental
challenges and pandemic crisis of COVID‑19. Educ Health Promot
2020;9:250.
18. Graneheim U, Landman B. Qualitative content analysis in
nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve
trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 2004;24:105‑12.
19. 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 2011;35:573‑81.
20. Santos PP dos, Tavares AO, Zêzere JL. Risk analysis for local
management from hydro‑geomorphologic disaster databases.
Environ Sci Policy 2014;40:85‑100.
21. Vos F. WORKING PAPER Work Package 3 Review of Disaster
Databases Collecting Human Impact Data in Europe; 2012.
22. Moriyama K, Sasaki D, Ono Y. Comparison of global
databases for disaster loss and damage data. Disaster Res
2018;13:1007‑14.
23. Gall M. The suitability of disaster loss databases to measure loss
and damage from climate change. Int J Glob Warm 2015;8:170.
24. Mohleji S. Gaining from losses: Using disaster loss data as a tool
for appraising natural disaster policy. ProQuest Dissertations and
Theses. University of Colorado; 2011.
25. Guidelines | EM‑DAT. Available from: https://www.emdat.be/
guidelines. [Last accessed on 2020 Dec 16].
)