The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Disaster Bioethics: Normative Issues When Nothing is Normal
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
One accepted principle is to attend to the people most-at-risk first.
“One accepted principle is to attend to the people most-at-risk first [10, 11].”
From Fair navigation planning: a humanitarian robot use case (2020) · cites this paper as [11]
Discussions and claims of unfairness are raised regarding disaster response hospital locations when they favor people of specific backgrounds, sometimes politically or commercially favorable to the country backing the response.
“For example, discussions and claims of unfairness are raised regarding disaster response hospital locations when they favor people of specific backgrounds, sometimes politically or commercially favorable to the country backing the response [11].”
From Fair navigation planning: a humanitarian robot use case (2020) · cites this paper as [11]
In disaster response, such a robot could continue or even reinforce common criticisms in disaster response missions: that policies for selecting disaster response locations usually benefit particular groups of people.
“In disaster response, such a robot could continue or even reinforce common criticisms in disaster response missions: that policies for selecting disaster response locations usually benefit particular groups of people [11].”
From Fair navigation planning: a humanitarian robot use case (2020) · cites this paper as [11]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fair navigation planning: a humanitarian robot use case
Brandao, M. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2006.14479
Metadata
- Authors
- O’Mathúna, D. P., Gordijn, B., & Clarke, M. J.
- Affiliations
- Dublin City University (IE)
- Queen's University Belfast (GB)
- Venue
- Public Health Ethics Analysis
- Publisher
- Springer Netherlands
- Published
- 2014
- ISSN
- 2211-6680 (ISSN-L)
- 2211-6699
- OpenAlex
- W2483532837
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 7.22
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Public health ethics analysis (publishedVersion)
- Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Disaster Response and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
- Keywords
- triage, resource constraints, informed consent, communication ethics, disaster preparedness, research oversight
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
