ArticleMedicine2020
Pilot study of a longitudinal integrated disaster and military medicine education program for undergraduate medical students.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Curriculum design in disaster and mass casualty education: a scoping review of healthcare education.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Monitoring and evaluation in disaster management courses: a scoping review.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Article
- An Adapted Hybrid Model for Hands-On Practice on Disaster and Military Medicine Education in Undergraduate Medical Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of acute medicine · 2022Article
- M3: The military medicine module: A focussed competency-based program.Medical journal, Armed Forces India · 2021Article
- E-Learning in Teaching Emergency Disaster Response Among Undergraduate Medical Students in Malaysia.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Covid-19 and Ukrainian Crisis Exponentiates the Need for the Inclusion of Conflict and Disaster Medicine in Medical Curriculum.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Disaster medicine education in medical curricula is scarce and frequently nonexistent. It is reasonable to initiate educational approaches for physicians in this field at the medical school level. An understanding of disaster medicine and the health care system during massive casualty incidents has been recommended as an integral part of the medical curriculum in the United States and Germany.The goal of the reformed curriculum was to develop a longitudinal integrated disaster and military medicine education program extending from the first year to the sixth year based on previously separated clinical and military medicine topics. Emergency medicine physicians, military emergency medical technicians, and Tactical Combat Casualty Care instructors formed an interprofessional faculty group and designed a learning curriculum.A total of 230 medical students participated in the revised disaster preparedness curriculum. Satisfaction survey response rates were high (201/230, 87.4%). Most of the free-text comments on the program were highly appreciative. The students considered the number of teaching hours for the whole program to be adequate. The students showed significant improvements in knowledge and judgment regarding disaster medicine after the program.We found that medical students were highly interested, were appreciative of, and actively participated in this longitudinal integrated disaster and military medicine education program, but gaps existed between the students' scores and the educators' expectations. The educators believed that the students needed more disaster preparedness knowledge and skills.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.