Discussion Informed by Recurrent Lessons from a Systematic Review on Targeting Practices in Urban Humanitarian Crises.

Ronak Patel, Jami King, Laura Phelps, David Sanderson
{"title":"Discussion Informed by Recurrent Lessons from a Systematic Review on Targeting Practices in Urban Humanitarian Crises.","authors":"Ronak Patel,&nbsp;Jami King,&nbsp;Laura Phelps,&nbsp;David Sanderson","doi":"10.1371/currents.dis.0d0be4b294b40f5e51ee7b58d9687ea0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Urbanization has challenged many humanitarian practices given the complexity of cities. Urban humanitarian crises have similarly made identifying vulnerable populations difficult. As humanitarians respond to cities with chronic deficiencies in basic needs stressed by a crisis, identifying and prioritizing the most in need populations with finite resources is critical.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The full systematic review applied standard systematic review methodology that was described in detail, peer-reviewed, and published before the research was conducted.Results: While the science of humanitarian practice is still developing, a systematic review of targeting vulnerable populations in urban humanitarian crises shed some light on the evidence base to guide policy and practice. This systematic review, referenced and available online, led to further findings that did not meet the pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria for evidence set out in the full review but that the authors, in their expert opinion, believe provide valuable insight nonetheless given their recurrence.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>These additional findings that did not meet criteria for evidence and formal inclusion in the full manuscript, but deemed valuable by the subject expert authors, are discussed in this commentary.</p>","PeriodicalId":74464,"journal":{"name":"PLoS currents","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5693362/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS currents","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/currents.dis.0d0be4b294b40f5e51ee7b58d9687ea0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Urbanization has challenged many humanitarian practices given the complexity of cities. Urban humanitarian crises have similarly made identifying vulnerable populations difficult. As humanitarians respond to cities with chronic deficiencies in basic needs stressed by a crisis, identifying and prioritizing the most in need populations with finite resources is critical.

Methods: The full systematic review applied standard systematic review methodology that was described in detail, peer-reviewed, and published before the research was conducted.Results: While the science of humanitarian practice is still developing, a systematic review of targeting vulnerable populations in urban humanitarian crises shed some light on the evidence base to guide policy and practice. This systematic review, referenced and available online, led to further findings that did not meet the pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria for evidence set out in the full review but that the authors, in their expert opinion, believe provide valuable insight nonetheless given their recurrence.

Discussion: These additional findings that did not meet criteria for evidence and formal inclusion in the full manuscript, but deemed valuable by the subject expert authors, are discussed in this commentary.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

从城市人道主义危机中针对性做法的系统审查中获得的经验教训为讨论提供参考。
导言:由于城市的复杂性,城市化对许多人道主义实践提出了挑战。城市人道主义危机同样使识别弱势群体变得困难。在人道主义工作者应对因危机而长期缺乏基本需求的城市时,确定资源有限、最需要帮助的人群并将其列为优先事项至关重要。方法:完整的系统评价采用标准的系统评价方法,该方法在研究开始前进行了详细的描述、同行评议并发表。结果:虽然人道主义实践科学仍在发展中,但对城市人道主义危机中针对弱势群体的系统回顾为指导政策和实践提供了一些证据基础。这一系统综述被引用并可在线获取,进一步的发现不符合完整综述中规定的预先定义的证据纳入和排除标准,但作者在其专家意见中认为,鉴于其复发性,这些发现提供了有价值的见解。讨论:这些不符合证据标准和正式纳入全文的附加发现,但被主题专家作者认为有价值,在本评论中进行讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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