ReviewFrontiers in medicine2026
Integrating emergency medical services and hospital surge capacity for mass-gathering preparedness: a structured narrative review.
Review in Frontiers in 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mass gatherings can generate concentrated, time-dependent demand across in-event health services, municipal emergency medical services (EMS), emergency departments, and inpatient services. Evidence relevant to preparedness is heterogeneous and is often reported with inconsistent denominators, limiting direct comparison. Methods: This structured narrative review synthesizes published evidence on EMS and hospital surge-capacity integration across the four surge domains of staff, stuff/supplies, space, and systems. The review retained the original structured search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for 2010-February 2026 and incorporated a focused PubMed and citation update through September 2026. Because the purpose is interpretive synthesis rather than exhaustive effect estimation, no Results: A 2025 scoping review of 41 papers reported medical-doctor presence in 34/41 papers (82.9%), medication interventions in 23/41 (56.1%), procedural interventions in 23/41 (56.1%), health-support systems in 18/41 (43.9%), mobile treatment spaces in 23/41 (56.1%), and temporary structures in 21/41 (51.2%). That review reported median calculated patient-presentation and transport-to-hospital rates of 6.2 and 0.35 per 1,000 attendees, respectively, whereas a separate 22-article stadium review reported much lower medians when standardized per 10,000 spectators. Hospital effects were directionally heterogeneous: a 14-study systematic review found event-associated emergency-department changes ranging from 7.5%-37% decreases to increases as high as 83% in specific settings. Digital integration has shown promising simulated gains, but clinical effectiveness remains insufficiently validated. Conclusion: Preparedness is best treated as an integrated continuum rather than as separate event-site and hospital plans. Standardized denominators, linked patient-level data, context-specific resource design, and prospective evaluation are priorities.
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.