English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Planning for a disaster is often influenced by the dual factors of perception of probabilities and current technology.  Response design is built upon assumptions on the size, scope, and severity of the catastrophe.  Yet, history documents myriad disasters that far surpassed even the direst predictions.  Similarly, response mechanisms build upon what is in use at the time in terms of equipment, transportation, and employment.  Current planning factors may prove inadequate to address a disaster of historical proportion.  The authors offer a review of significant disasters as a measure of the potential scope of needed medical response and the inherent shortcomings therein.  They call for a more comprehensive approach to medical response planning.

Medical Response Capabilities to a Catastrophic Disaster: "House" or House of Cards?