ReviewCureus2026
Evaluating Targeted Recruitment Interventions and Outcomes to Measure Diversity in Emergency Medicine: A Scoping Review.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As the US national population continues to diversify, there have been access and engagement efforts within emergency medicine (EM) to help create a workforce that is more representative of the patients we treat. While the importance of diversity is well recognized, there has not been an established way to measure the effectiveness of diversity interventions beyond demographics. This scoping review aims to identify targeted interventions to recruit underrepresented groups in EM and to determine appropriate outcomes to measure diversity in any field that can be applied to EM. We conducted a literature search in March 2023 using the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for articles published from 2008 to the present. Abstracts were independently reviewed by two reviewers to identify potentially relevant articles, and the full text of articles meeting the inclusion criteria was subsequently reviewed. Selected articles were organized into two categories: interventions within EM or measurable outcomes. The reported outcomes were then grouped into themes. The literature search identified 4,696 total abstracts for the review, of which 53 were for interventions in EM and 4,643 for outcomes. Of the 157 abstracts selected for full-text review, 69 articles were selected for inclusion. Fourteen articles identified strategies to recruit underrepresented groups into EM at all levels through pipeline programs, recruitment initiatives, transparent compensation/promotion, and faculty development programs. A total of 55 articles provided measurable outcomes, with 74.5% focused on gender, 7.3% on underrepresented minorities in medicine, and 18.2% focused on both. The derived outcomes from the 55 articles were organized into the following themes in order of most commonly mentioned: promotion/rank (35 out of 55, 63.6%), leadership positions (32 out of 55, 58.2%), H-indices (21 out of 55, 38.2%), number of publications (18 out of 55, 32.7%), and compensation (14 out of 55, 25.5%). Additional outcomes to consider included authorship (first vs. last), national speaking opportunities, national awards, and grant funding. Overall, this scoping review discovered diversity initiatives within EM and appropriate outcomes to measure diversity. The next step is to use these outcomes to determine whether our efforts are having the intended effect of promoting equity and inclusion in EM.
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.