The author used research from specific projects in different areas and compared them to come to a conclusion. They also used a number of articles and research papers to further support their work.
The Ebola outbreak is, by its very definition, a matter of public health. The outbreak presented a danger to the global health community and resulting policies dealing with this epidemic were public health policies. That being said, the policy in place mostly served as a protocol mostly for agencies of New York in the event the epidemic spread. It focused on standardizing the practices of health, transport, and government agencies in the event of an outbreak; it did not focus on individuals already effected with the disease, but more so on preventing the spread of the epidemic.
At least one further study has been conducted using this data. A more focussed paper on the Kenema District in Sierra Leone was written, addressing the staggering number of cases with infected healthcare workers. The paper is titled "Facors Underlying Ebola Virus Infection Among healthcare Workers, Kenema, Sierra Leone, 2014-2015." The paper reached similar conlusions as the original one, with a need for better practices in infection control and prevention.
The article's primary focus is the failure of a government agency in the wake of the 9/11. The EPA's inadequate response to air pollution and subsequent public misguidance led to a multitude of public health issues. While the article does not explicitly detail the issues stated in this lawsuit, it does mention the EPA's failure to properly formulate and enact a plan to clean up materials released into the air.
The Act is hailed by many as important in supporting the emergency services community. In 2015, the Act was reauthorized for an additional 75 years of support, something many fought for as the deadline approached for the renewal and nothing had been discussed. Numerous articles cite the importance of the policy in protecting and supporting victims of the attack's lasting affects.
The program does not appear to have any length or requirements for members of its faculty. As a medical center, obviously those providing patient care need to be licensed medical professionals; however, there does not seem to be a written time commitment or contract for these individuals. Much of the Center's work revolves around on-going studies focusing on providing basic health care and interventions to incarcerated populations. This research is then presented by the Center in several ways: panel discussions, peer-reviewed articles, lobbying of policy makers, documentary films, interviews, ect.
The author, Didier Fassin, is an anthropologist and sociologist at the Institute for Advanced Study. He is a professor of Political Science and orginially a physician in internal medicine. He researches public health and "medical anthropology" looking at AIDs epidemiology, mortality disparities, and global at large. He is hailed as the developer of "moral anthropology, which looks at moral judgement's effect on everyday life and international relations. He conducted research in Senegal, Ecuador, and France, focusing on power and inequality issues. He was also the CP for MSF from 1999-2003.
I can only presume through black magic, as I have no idea how technology works
Emergency response isn't directly addressed as much as ongoing access to care.
This article undertakes reviewing the current approaches to handling mental health in the wake of disasters. It particularly focuses of the current methodologies of research utilized, past methodologies/findings, and how these effect today's approaches to treatment of mental disorders during emergency response. The article begins by discussing the major psychopathology found in populations effected by disasters, including mood disorders such as PTSD and MDD. Other disorders, such as substance abuse and outside symptomologies, are also discussed-- but these first two seem to be the major players addressed here. The work then describes how current comorbidities exist, and how these manifest as pre-disaster risk factors (for example, female disaster survivors are generally more likely to have adverse psychological outcomes, such as PTSD or MDD). Other factors include age, socioeconomic status, and basal trait-level anxiety/depressive symptoms. The report also speaks to during disaster and post-disaster factors as well, as these both have been shown to indicate increased likelihood of developing mental health disorders from a disaster event. Finally, the report delves into current interventions utilized during all three of these time periods (pre, peri, and post), and how these may amplify or diminish the mental health effects of a disaster event. Unfortunately, the paper gives very general guidelines, such as discouraging building in vulnerable locations or testing responses in communities even before disasters occur. For post-disaster preventative measures, however, the report included several key notations-- including implementation of stress debriefings for disaster survivors, and usage of PFA (psychological first aid) to prevent adverse mental health outcomes.