The article was mainly backed by statistical evidence and cited other reesearch articles and studies. The authors, I assume, used their own extensive backgrounds in the field to support their arguments and views.
The app was actually designed originally as an experiement by the Institute for the Study of Coherence and Emergence. The members of their Affirmative Consent Division were given the app as an experiment on the context of discussion around cosent. The idea was to test how discussion about consent affects the consent itself and the acts following. The Institute page doesn't really say where the funding is from, though I'd say privately through members and sponsors.
This system definitely shouldnt be used as a means of diagnosis when a doctor is completely stumped for answers. Its a tool but not a reliable resource.
Dr. Schmid supports her point of view by discussing the flaws in the current system, such as how responses tend to only cause reforms at an organizational level rather than internationally. She also discusses how incorporating civilian education can help ease fears and improve how civilians react to incidents. Finally, she mentions various agencies that could organize international nuclear response, supporting her argument that it is possible bring together more people that just those who are technically elite.
This is a program targeted to students with bachelors, masters, or professional degrees who desire to protect people from the various consequences of nuclear disasters.
"The poor are the natural constituents of public health, and physicians, as Virchow argued, are the natural attorneys of the poor."
"Because of contact with patients, physicians readily appreciate that largescale social forces—racism, gender inequality, poverty, political violence and war, and sometimes the very policies that address them—often determine who falls ill and who has access to care."
"The term “structural violence” is one way of describing social arrangements that put individuals and populations in harm's way"
The author used a combination of field-based research and article examination to produce their arguments and conclusions.
Andrew Lakoff is an associate professor of anthropology, sociology, and communication at the University of Southern California, Berkeley. He expertise lies in the anthropology of science and medicine and the implications of biomedical innovations. He does not appear to be professionally situated in emergency response. He has only written on book on a macro scale titled, "Disaster and the Politics of Intervention," but he appears to have no further association or expertise in the field.
Stephen J. Collier is the chair of the Graduate Program in International Affairs at the New School in New York City. He is an expert in economic regulation, social welfare, and emergency management in Russia, the Republic of Georgia, and in the United States. He is currently researching the emergence of vital systems security in disaster policy, homeland security, and infrastructure protection. In this manner, he is related with emergency response. He also has a number of publications listed on his CV in relation to disaster response.
The study was funded by the WHO Country Office for Sierra leone.
They have produced a number of articles which can be found here: http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/our-work/medical-research
A few of the recent highlights are articles that discuss the impacts of masss vaccination campaigns, how to care for victims of sexual violence, and what effect ready to use food can offer in a nutritional emergency.