Scholarlink

Background <p>Effective 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.</p> Objective <p>To map the structure, educational strategies, competency focus, and outcome evaluation approaches of disaster and MCI education curricula for healthcare learners and professionals.</p> Methods <p>We 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.</p> Results <p>Forty-one studies were included. Curricula were classified as stand-alone (<i>n</i> = 14, 34.1%), embedded (<i>n</i> = 16, 39.0%), longitudinal (<i>n</i> = 4, 9.8%), or model proposals (<i>n</i> = 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.</p> Conclusion <p>Disaster 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.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Curriculum design in disaster and mass casualty education: a scoping review of healthcare education

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月17日

查看全文
  • Naglaa Mohamed Abdelhamied,
  • Abu Omayer,
  • Salma Abdalla Elmisbah,
  • Mohamed Alali,
  • Hossam Hassan Yussef,
  • Azza Yousif,
  • Ives Hubloue,
  • Nabil Zary

摘要

Background

Effective 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.

Objective

To map the structure, educational strategies, competency focus, and outcome evaluation approaches of disaster and MCI education curricula for healthcare learners and professionals.

Methods

We 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.

Results

Forty-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.

Conclusion

Disaster 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.