Description
Metadata
Settings
About:
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess household preparedness for emergency events and its determinants in China. DESIGN: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted on 3541 households in China in 2015. PARTICIPANTS: Households were selected using a stratified cluster sampling strategy, representing central, eastern, western and southern regions of China. The designed questionnaires were administered through face-to-face interviews. OUTCOME MEASURES: Household emergency preparedness was measured with 14 indicators, tapping into the supply of nine emergency necessities (food and water, extra batteries, battery-powered radio, battery-operated torch, first-aid kit, gas mask, fire extinguisher, escape ropes, whistle), coverage of accident insurance, knowledge of local emergency response systems (emergency numbers, exit routes and shelters) and availability of a household evacuation plan. If an individual acted on 9 of the 14 indicators, they were deemed well prepared. Logistic regression models were established to identify predictors of well preparedness based on 3541 returned questionnaires containing no missing values. RESULTS: Only 9.9% of households were well prepared for emergencies: 53.6% did not know what to do and 31.6% did not want to think about it. A higher level of preparedness was found in the respondents who have attained higher education (adjusted OR=0.826 compared with the higher level), participated in emergency training activities (adjusted OR=2.299), had better emergency knowledge (adjusted OR=2.043), reported less fate-submissiveness (adjusted OR=1.385) and more self-reliance (adjusted OR=1.349), prior exposure to emergency events (adjusted OR=1.280) and held more positive attitudes towards preparedness (adjusted OR=1.286). CONCLUSION: Household preparedness for emergency events is poor in China. Lack of motivation, negative attitude to preparedness and knowledge shortfall are major but remediable barriers for household preparedness.
Permalink
an Entity references as follows:
Subject of Sentences In Document
Object of Sentences In Document
Explicit Coreferences
Implicit Coreferences
Graph IRI
Count
http://ns.inria.fr/covid19/graph/entityfishing
3
http://ns.inria.fr/covid19/graph/articles
3
Faceted Search & Find service v1.13.91
Alternative Linked Data Documents:
Sponger
|
ODE
Raw Data in:
CXML
|
CSV
| RDF (
N-Triples
N3/Turtle
JSON
XML
) | OData (
Atom
JSON
) | Microdata (
JSON
HTML
) |
JSON-LD
About
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License
.
OpenLink Virtuoso
version 07.20.3229 as of Jul 10 2020, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (94 GB total memory)
Copyright © 2009-2025 OpenLink Software