Evaluating the Performance of Agreement Metrics in a Delphi Study on Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Major Incidents Preparedness Using Classical and Machine Learning Approaches

IF 2.6 3区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Hassan Farhat, Alan M. Batt, Mariana Helou, Heejun Shin, James Laughton, Carolyn Dumbeck, Arezoo Dehghani, Fatemeh Rezaei, Nidaa Bajow, Luc Mortelmans, Walid Abougalala, Roberto Mugavero, Gregory Ciottone, Guillaume Alinier, Mohamed Ben Dhiab
{"title":"Evaluating the Performance of Agreement Metrics in a Delphi Study on Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Major Incidents Preparedness Using Classical and Machine Learning Approaches","authors":"Hassan Farhat,&nbsp;Alan M. Batt,&nbsp;Mariana Helou,&nbsp;Heejun Shin,&nbsp;James Laughton,&nbsp;Carolyn Dumbeck,&nbsp;Arezoo Dehghani,&nbsp;Fatemeh Rezaei,&nbsp;Nidaa Bajow,&nbsp;Luc Mortelmans,&nbsp;Walid Abougalala,&nbsp;Roberto Mugavero,&nbsp;Gregory Ciottone,&nbsp;Guillaume Alinier,&nbsp;Mohamed Ben Dhiab","doi":"10.1111/1468-5973.70044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Delphi studies in disaster medicine lack consensus on expert agreement metrics. This study examined various metrics using a Delphi study on chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) preparedness in the Middle East and North Africa region. Forty international disaster medicine experts evaluated 133 items across ten CBRN Preparedness Assessment Tool themes using a 5-point Likert scale. Agreement was measured using Kendall's W, Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, and Cohen's Kappa. Statistical and machine learning techniques compared metric performance. The overall agreement mean score was 4.91 ± 0.71, with 89.21% average agreement. Kappa emerged as the most sensitive metric in statistical and machine learning analyses, with a feature importance score of 168.32. The Kappa coefficient showed variations across CBRN PAT themes, including medical protocols, logistics, and infrastructure. The integrated statistical and machine learning approach provides a promising method for understanding expert consensus in disaster preparedness, with potential for future refinement by incorporating additional contextual factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":47674,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","volume":"33 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-5973.70044","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-5973.70044","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Delphi studies in disaster medicine lack consensus on expert agreement metrics. This study examined various metrics using a Delphi study on chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) preparedness in the Middle East and North Africa region. Forty international disaster medicine experts evaluated 133 items across ten CBRN Preparedness Assessment Tool themes using a 5-point Likert scale. Agreement was measured using Kendall's W, Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, and Cohen's Kappa. Statistical and machine learning techniques compared metric performance. The overall agreement mean score was 4.91 ± 0.71, with 89.21% average agreement. Kappa emerged as the most sensitive metric in statistical and machine learning analyses, with a feature importance score of 168.32. The Kappa coefficient showed variations across CBRN PAT themes, including medical protocols, logistics, and infrastructure. The integrated statistical and machine learning approach provides a promising method for understanding expert consensus in disaster preparedness, with potential for future refinement by incorporating additional contextual factors.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
12.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management is an invaluable source of information on all aspects of contingency planning, scenario analysis and crisis management in both corporate and public sectors. It focuses on the opportunities and threats facing organizations and presents analysis and case studies of crisis prevention, crisis planning, recovery and turnaround management. With contributions from world-wide sources including corporations, governmental agencies, think tanks and influential academics, this publication provides a vital platform for the exchange of strategic and operational experience, information and knowledge.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信