ReviewArchives of academic emergency medicine2026
Performance Indicators in Emergency Medical Services: A Scoping Review of Dashboard Applications in the Context of Crisis Management.
Review in Archives of academic emergency medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Emergency medical services (EMS) are critical for responding to crises and mass casualty incidents (MCIs). Rapid decision-making and effective patient flow management are essential for improving survival. Digital technologies-particularly dashboards-enable real-time monitoring of performance indicators and data-driven decision-making. This scoping review aimed to identify and classify key performance indicators (KPIs) used in EMS and to examine the role of dashboards in monitoring these indicators in both routine and crisis conditions. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to January 2026, supplemented by gray literature. Two independent reviewers screened titles/abstracts and full texts. Data were extracted using a standardized form and synthesized narratively in accordance with PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Results: Twenty-six studies were included. KPIs were categorized using the Donabedian model into structure (resources), process (response time, triage, coordination), and outcome (survival, satisfaction). Time-based indicators were most frequent. Eight studies (31%) reported dashboards, all in routine operations. Eight studies (31%) used real-time feedback devices (not classified as dashboards), and ten studies (38%) employed other digital tools. Only one study addressed crisis conditions, and it did not use a dashboard. Conclusion: Dashboards are predominantly applied in routine EMS operations, with very limited evidence in crisis contexts. Developing crisis-specific, context-adaptive dashboards and standardized indicators should be prioritized to support decision-making and coordination in emergencies and disasters.
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.