ArticleATS scholar2022
A Scoping Review and Appraisal of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Education Literature.
Article in ATS scholar, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Shared, Practical, Interactive Curriculum for Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (SPICE): Time to SPICE It Up!Cureus · 2026Article
- Clinicians' Knowledge, Confidence and Skills: A Retrospective Evaluation of an Interdisciplinary Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Simulation Workshop.Nursing in critical care · 2026Article
- ELSO 2025 Narrative Guideline on ECMO Training and Continuing Education.ASAIO journal (American Society for Artificial Internal Organs : 1992) · 2026Article
- Defining the Standard in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Education: A Necessary Beginning.ATS scholar · 2024Article
- A Multimodal Educational Boot Camp for Training Fellows in Pediatric Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO).MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2024Article
- Simulators and Simulations for Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: An ECMO Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite a recent rise in publications describing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) education, the scope and quality of ECMO educational research and curricular assessments have not previously been evaluated. Objective: The purposes of this study are Methods: A multidisciplinary research team conducted a scoping review of ECMO literature published between January 2009 and October 2021 using established frameworks. The Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) was applied to assess quality. Results: A total of 1,028 references were retrieved; 36 were selected for review. ECMO education studies frequently targeted the cognitive domain (78%), with 17% of studies targeting the psychomotor domain alone and 33% of studies targeting combinations of the cognitive, psychomotor, and affective domains. Thirty-three studies qualified for MERSQI scoring, with a median score of 11 (interquartile range, 4; possible range, 5-18). Simulation-based training was used in 97%, with 50% of studies targeting physicians and one other discipline. Conclusion: ECMO education frequently incorporates simulation and spans all domains of Bloom's taxonomy. Overall, MERSQI scores for ECMO education studies are similar to those for other simulation-based medical education studies. However, developing assessment tools with multisource validity evidence and conducting multienvironment studies would strengthen future work. The creation of a collaborative ECMO educational network would increase standardization and reproducibility in ECMO training, ultimately improving patient outcomes.
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.