2017
DOI: 10.2105/ajph.2017.303826
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hurricane Sandy (New Jersey): Mortality Rates in the Following Month and Quarter

Abstract: Mortality increased, heterogeneous by cause, for both periods after Hurricane Sandy, particularly in communities more severely affected and in the elderly, who may benefit from supportive services.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
39
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
2
39
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This expectation of having timely and accurate hurricane-related death counts immediately following a catastrophic disaster represents a failure among scientists and communicators to convey the inherent superiority of excess mortality estimation over "body counts" in complex disaster scenarios where surveillance systems and death certification processes are disrupted (Checchi & Roberts, 2008). Currently, there is little to guide communicators in making this distinction apparent to public audiences; while there is scientific literature related to mortality surveillance (Choudhary, 2012;Farag et al, 2013;Kim et al, 2017;Rocha et al, 2017;Seil et al, 2016) and documenting cause of death (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters [CRED], 2016;Lakkireddy et al, 2004;Phillips et al, 2014;Wexelman et al, 2013), there is a paucity of studies exploring the specific concept of communicating disaster mortality to the public. There is no literature base that examines how death counts from a disaster should be communicated to the media, how to best explain information gaps that are common following disasters, how death counts may evolve post-disaster, or how to explain the science behind excess death estimates and what we can or cannot infer from these estimates.…”
Section: Communication Of Disaster Mortality To the Publicmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This expectation of having timely and accurate hurricane-related death counts immediately following a catastrophic disaster represents a failure among scientists and communicators to convey the inherent superiority of excess mortality estimation over "body counts" in complex disaster scenarios where surveillance systems and death certification processes are disrupted (Checchi & Roberts, 2008). Currently, there is little to guide communicators in making this distinction apparent to public audiences; while there is scientific literature related to mortality surveillance (Choudhary, 2012;Farag et al, 2013;Kim et al, 2017;Rocha et al, 2017;Seil et al, 2016) and documenting cause of death (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters [CRED], 2016;Lakkireddy et al, 2004;Phillips et al, 2014;Wexelman et al, 2013), there is a paucity of studies exploring the specific concept of communicating disaster mortality to the public. There is no literature base that examines how death counts from a disaster should be communicated to the media, how to best explain information gaps that are common following disasters, how death counts may evolve post-disaster, or how to explain the science behind excess death estimates and what we can or cannot infer from these estimates.…”
Section: Communication Of Disaster Mortality To the Publicmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In New Jersey, Hurricane Sandy had a particularly deleterious effect on older people. Kim et al (2017) report that allcause mortality rates of people aged 76 and older increased 10% in the month following the hurricane, with mortality rates particularly high in communities severely affected by the storm. Assisted living facilities reported a surge in applications (Eltman, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The length of studies, including prospective follow-up and retrospective assessment, ranged from 1 month to 95 years. Most studies (n=36) focused on disasters that occurred in North America (12,(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)36,37,40,(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)49,50,52,53,(55)(56)(57)(58)(61)(62)(63)(65)(66)(67)(68)(69)(70)73,74), followed by Europe (n=13) (27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)39,41,51,60,71,72). The remaining disasters occurred in Asia (n=7)…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The length of follow-up ranged from 1 month to 13 years. There were 23 studies that examined natural disasters (12,4244,46,49,50,5254,5659,62,63,65,7174), and 11 studies that examined human-made disasters (41,47,48,51,55,60,61,6670). Of these studies, only one evaluated the impact of an infectious disease epidemic (64).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation