ArticleBMC medical education2026
Curriculum design in disaster and mass casualty education: a scoping review of healthcare education.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective disaster and mass casualty incident (MCI) response depends on healthcare professionals who can apply clinical, operational, and team-based competencies under pressure. However, existing reviews have not comprehensively mapped how disaster and MCI curricula are designed, delivered, and evaluated across healthcare education settings.
objectiveTo map the structure, educational strategies, competency focus, and outcome evaluation approaches of disaster and MCI education curricula for healthcare learners and professionals.
methodsWe conducted a scoping review following Arksey and O'Malley's framework, JBI guidance, and PRISMA-ScR reporting. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar were searched for English-language studies published from 2015 to 2025. The search was updated on 6 January 2026. Two reviewers independently screened studies and charted data. Outcomes were mapped using Moore's Expanded Outcomes Framework.
resultsForty-one studies were included. Curricula were classified as stand-alone (n = 14, 34.1%), embedded (n = 16, 39.0%), longitudinal (n = 4, 9.8%), or model proposals (n = 7, 17.1%). Outcome evaluation was concentrated at lower Moore levels: 22 studies (53.7%) assessed satisfaction, 16 (39.0%) assessed declarative knowledge, 18 (43.9%) assessed procedural knowledge, 15 (36.6%) assessed competence in simulated or controlled settings, and 5 (12.2%) assessed real-world performance. No study assessed patient-, community-, or system-level outcomes. Only six studies (14.6%) explicitly targeted interprofessional learner groups.
conclusionDisaster and MCI education curricula are increasingly reported but remain heterogeneous in structure and evaluation. Future curricula should strengthen alignment between competencies, teaching methods, and assessments; include interprofessional learning where relevant; and use feasible approaches to assess competence and real-world performance.
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.