EH professionals/disaster relief workers.
Material type:
TextLanguage: ENG Publication details: 1992Description: 4 pSubject: An assumption is made that environmental health services in disaster relief or refugee camps should be planned and implemented by environmental health professionals. A basic need for anyone planning those services is an understanding of the relationship of biological, chemical and physical environmental factors to their associated diseases. Using a modified decision analysis method (the Normalized Weight Rating Technique), this study compared the perception of that association between environmental health professionals to that of disaster relief and refugee camp workers. No statistical difference was found to exist, suggesting that such services need not necessarily be prioritized solely by general environmental health professionals. The study also showed that environmental health professionals do not uniformly perceive health priorities the same, given the same set of circumstances, contrary to the general assumption among decision analysts that professionals will tend to make similar decisions. The study suggests that practising environmental health professionals may need stronger backgrounds in public health and the causal association of disease and the environment
| Item type | Current library | Collection | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Books
|
Australian Emergency Management Library | BOOK | 363.34525 EHP (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Available | 005719193 |
Browsing Australian Emergency Management Library shelves, Collection: BOOK Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
EH professionals, disaster relief workers
Reprinted from Journal of Environmental Health; Vol. 54, no. 4; p. 25-28
Reprint
An assumption is made that environmental health services in disaster relief or refugee camps should be planned and implemented by environmental health professionals. A basic need for anyone planning those services is an understanding of the relationship of biological, chemical and physical environmental factors to their associated diseases. Using a modified decision analysis method (the Normalized Weight Rating Technique), this study compared the perception of that association between environmental health professionals to that of disaster relief and refugee camp workers. No statistical difference was found to exist, suggesting that such services need not necessarily be prioritized solely by general environmental health professionals. The study also showed that environmental health professionals do not uniformly perceive health priorities the same, given the same set of circumstances, contrary to the general assumption among decision analysts that professionals will tend to make similar decisions. The study suggests that practising environmental health professionals may need stronger backgrounds in public health and the causal association of disease and the environment
There are no comments on this title.