Disaster Medicine Education for Medical Students: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Education and training in disaster medicine for undergraduate medical students have been advocated for years in several countries. Despite the inclusion of disaster medicine into the medical curriculum being a reality in certain countries, such as the United States and Germany, it is still under scrutiny and yet to be embraced globally. The objective of the study was to examine and map the range of literature and evidence available to support the inclusion of disaster education in the undergraduate medical curriculum and the identification of the related research gaps. A scoping review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews methodology proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. A study protocol was designed and distributed to all the authors. English articles published in peer-reviewed journals were searched across various databases for the period between 2004 and 2021. Abstracts and available full texts referring to the incorporation of disaster health educational programs into the undergraduate medical curriculum in different forms and formats were included. Sixty-four articles were collected from 2004 to 2021. The bulk of the articles published was from the USA (n = 24), Germany (n = 6), Italy (n = 5), Saudi Arabia (n = 4), the UK (n = 3), India (n = 3), and Canada (n = 3). The types of articles included were mainly survey studies (n = 26) and pilot studies (n = 12). Forty-six (71.9%) articles included were based on courses taught on disaster medicine. The modes of teaching used were mainly face-to-face, simulation, and e-learning. The curriculum covered in the taught courses included general principles of disaster medicine (n = 34), chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear/bioterrorism (n = 10), and pandemics (n = 2). Thirty-three articles were based on a single course while 13 articles studied more than one course. Further research in disaster health education, establishing a concise undergraduate medical curriculum globally, using technology and simulation, training the faculty, and developing interdisciplinary disaster education programs were the significant gaps identified in this study. Available literature supports the inclusion of disaster medicine into the undergraduate medical curriculum globally. However, the boundaries and the inclusion criteria of the basic disaster health educational program into the existing undergraduate medical curriculum must be defined and agreed upon.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".