Abstract
Abstract
Background: Emergency rescue offers an important means to effectively respond to disasters and quickly restore normalization afterwards. With the rapid development of biotechnology, it is crucial to evaluate rescue capability in response to bioterrorism incidents, yet there is a lack of specific measurement standards and complete evaluation system. The purpose of this article is to establish an evaluation system for emergency rescue capability during bioterrorism events.
Methods: The index was established through the improved Delphi method, while the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model was established on the basis of AHP. Experts in disaster work and research were invited to rate indicator items using the Likert scale, calculating the degree of agreement for each indicator using the Kendall coefficient W to assess expert consensus, then screen and identify indicators using the cutoff method. The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model was formed by calculating the weight of the judgment matrix.
Results: Over two rounds of expert inquiry, 11 experts participated in the improved Delphi study (the response rate was 100%), and the Kendall coordination coefficients of the first and second rounds were 0.303 and 0.632 respectively (P < 0.05). According to the comprehensive score, coefficient of variation and full score ratio, 5 first-level indicators and 25 second-level indicators were determined. A fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model based on AHP was established to evaluate the rescue response from bioterrorism.
Conclusions: The expert group reached a consensus on all indicators of the model and overall, the model has sound content validity. The next step is to transform the evaluation model into a scale, verify its operability, and apply it to actual evaluation work to promote capacity building across the biological incident rescue team.
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference21 articles.
1. Katz R, Graeden E, Abe K, Attal-Juncqua A, Boyce MR, Eaneff S. Mapping stakeholders and policies in response to deliberate biological events. Heliyon. 2018;4(12):e1091. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S240584401832351X https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S240584401832351X?httpAccept=text/xml doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e01091.
2. Terrorism NCFT. gtd search results ; cited 2023-2-13]. Available from: https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?chart=overtime&search=biological&count=100.
3. Calamai F, Derkenne C, Jost D, Travers S, Klein I, Bertho K et al. The chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (cbrn) chain of survival: a new pragmatic and didactic tool used by paris fire brigade. Crit Care. 2019;23(1). Available from: https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-019-2364-2 http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s13054-019-2364-2.pdf doi: 10.1186/s13054-019-2364-2.
4. ä¸å人民å
±å’å½çç©å®å
¨æ³_ä¸å½äººå¤§ç½‘; cited 2023-2-13]. Available from: http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/c30834/202010/bb3bee5122854893a69acf4005a66059.shtml.
5. åæ¨æ° å¬å±å«çåºæ¥æ‘æ´éä¼å»ºè®¾ç究述评. ä¸å
±ç¦å»ºçå§å
æ ¡(ç¦å»ºè¡æ¿å¦é¢)å¦æ¥. 2022(5):117 – 25. Available from: https://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/periodical/ChlQZXJpb2RpY2FsQ0hJTmV3UzIwMjMwMTEyEhN6Z2Zqc3dkeHhiMjAyMjA1MDEzGghtZDUzNWJrNw%3D%3D doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-4088.2022.05.013.