Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2011

Schroeder, Erika D.; Jacquet, Gabrielle A.; Becker, Torben K.; Foran, Mark; Goldberg, Elizabeth M.; Aschkenasy, Miriam; Bertsch, Karina; Levine, Adam C.

doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2012.01447.x

Cited by 18 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our review began in 2005 in an attempt to identify and consolidate the relevant global EM literature into a format that is readily available to academics and practitioners. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] This year, our panel of reviewers and editors included physicians from Canada, Ethiopia, Ghana, Singapore, and the United States.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2016

Becker

Hansoti

Bartels

et al. 2017

Academic Emergency Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) conducts an annual search of peerreviewed and gray literature relevant to global emergency medicine (EM) to identify, review, and disseminate the most important new research in this field to a global audience of academics and clinical practitioners.Methods: This year 13,890 articles written in four languages were identified by our search. These articles were distributed among 20 reviewers for initial screening based on their relevance to the field of global EM. An additional two reviewers searched the gray literature. All articles that were deemed appropriate by at least one reviewer and approved by their editor underwent formal scoring of overall quality and importance. Two independent reviewers scored all articles.Results: A total of 716 articles met our inclusion criteria and underwent full review. Fifty-nine percent were categorized as emergency care in resource-limited settings, 17% as EM development, and 24% as disaster and humanitarian response. Nineteen articles received scores of 18.5 or higher out of a maximum score of 20 and were selected for formal summary and critique. Inter-rater reliability testing between reviewers revealed Cohen's kappa of 0.441. Conclusions:In 2016, the total number of articles identified by our search continued to increase. The proportion of articles in each of the three categories remained stable. Studies and reviews with a focus on infectious diseases, pediatrics, and the use of ultrasound in resource-limited settings represented the majority of articles selected for final review. identify and consolidate the relevant global EM literature into a format that is readily available to academics and practitioners. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] This year, our panel of reviewers and editors included physicians from Canada, Ethiopia, Ghana, Singapore, and the United States. T he Global EmergencyOur group strives to identify the most relevant practice changing articles, by scouring both the peerreviewed and gray literature via a comprehensive search strategy. Gray literature has been defined as any material produced by an organization whose primary function is not peer-reviewed academic publication. 12Our goal in performing a gray literature search is to identify new global EM research conducted by government agencies, local or international nongovernmental organizations, or other entities that may not have published in peer-reviewed journals.The primary goals of the review are to illustrate best practices, stimulate research, and promote further professionalization in the field of global EM through the identification of important new publications that focus on emergency care in the global context, including care provision in limited-resource settings, disaster and humanitarian response, and the development of EM as a clinical discipline throughout the world. At the same time, it is important to note that this review is not a formal systematic review or meta-analysis, as it does not aim to synthesize th...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2016

Becker

Hansoti

Bartels

et al. 2017

Academic Emergency Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is also the database used for published literature reviews such as the annual Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review and many published papers on disaster medicine, public health crises and global health. 4 , 7 , 8 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework and Methodology for Navigating Disaster and Global Health in Crisis Literature

Chan

Burkle

2013

PLoS Curr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both ‘disasters’ and ‘global health in crisis’ research has dramatically grown due to the ever-increasing frequency and magnitude of crises around the world. Large volumes of peer-reviewed literature are not only a testament to the field’s value and evolution, but also present an unprecedented outpouring of seemingly unmanageable information across a wide array of crises and disciplines. Disaster medicine, health and humanitarian assistance, global health and public health disaster literature all lie within the disaster and global health in crisis literature spectrum and are increasingly accepted as multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary disciplines. Researchers, policy makers, and practitioners now face a new challenge; that of accessing this expansive literature for decision-making and exploring new areas of research. Individuals are also reaching beyond the peer-reviewed environment to grey literature using search engines like Google Scholar to access policy documents, consensus reports and conference proceedings. What is needed is a method and mechanism with which to search and retrieve relevant articles from this expansive body of literature. This manuscript presents both a framework and workable process for a diverse group of users to navigate the growing peer-reviewed and grey disaster and global health in crises literature. Methods: Disaster terms from textbooks, peer-reviewed and grey literature were used to design a framework of thematic clusters and subject matter ‘nodes’. A set of 84 terms, selected from 143 curated terms was organized within each node reflecting topics within the disaster and global health in crisis literature. Terms were crossed with one another and the term ‘disaster’. The results were formatted into tables and matrices. This process created a roadmap of search terms that could be applied to the PubMed database. Each search in the matrix or table results in a listed number of articles. This process was applied to literature from PubMed from 2005-2011. A complementary process was also applied to Google Scholar using the same framework of clusters, nodes, and terms expanding the search process to include the broader grey literature assets. Results: A framework of four thematic clusters and twelve subject matter nodes were designed to capture diverse disaster and global health in crisis-related content. From 2005-2011 there were 18,660 articles referring to the term [disaster]. Restricting the search to human research, MeSH, and English language there remained 7,736 identified articles representing an unmanageable number to adequately process for research, policy or best practices. However, using the crossed search and matrix process revealed further examples of robust realms of research in disasters, emergency medicine, EMS, public health and global health. Examples of potential gaps in current peer-reviewed disaster and global health in crisis literature were identified as mental health, elderly care, and alternate sites of care. The same framework and process was then applied to ...

show abstract

“…Our review began in 2005 in an attempt to identify and consolidate the relevant global EM literature into a format that is readily available to academics and clinicians. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] This year, our panel of reviewers and editors included physicians from Australia, Canada, Ethiopia, Ghana, Laos, Rwanda, and the United States.Our group strives to identify the most relevant practice-changing articles, by scouring both the peerreviewed and the gray literature via a comprehensive search strategy. Gray literature has been defined as any material produced by an organization whose primary function is not peer-reviewed academic publication.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2017

Becker

Trehan²,

Hayward

et al. 2018

Academic Emergency Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) conducts an annual search of peerreviewed and gray literature relevant to global emergency medicine (EM) to identify, review, and disseminate the most important new research in this field to a global audience of academics and clinical practitioners.Methods: This year, 17,722 articles written in three languages were identified by our electronic search. These articles were distributed among 20 reviewers for initial screening based on their relevance to the field of global EM. Another two reviewers searched the gray literature, yielding an additional 11 articles. All articles that were deemed appropriate by at least one reviewer and approved by their editor underwent formal scoring of overall quality and importance. Two independent reviewers scored all articles.Results: A total of 848 articles met our inclusion criteria and underwent full review. Sixty-three percent were categorized as emergency care in resource-limited settings, 23% as disaster and humanitarian response, and 14% as EM development. Twenty-one articles received scores of 18.5 or higher out of a maximum score 20 and were selected for formal summary and critique. Inter-rater reliability testing between reviewers revealed a Cohen's kappa of 0.344. Conclusions:In 2017, the total number of articles identified by our search continued to increase. Studies and reviews with a focus on infectious diseases, pediatrics, and trauma represented the majority of top-scoring articles.T he Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) strives to improve the global practice of emergency medicine (EM) by facilitating emergency care practitioners' identification of the most current and important research conducted on relevant topics around the world. Our review began in 2005 in an attempt to identify and consolidate the relevant global EM literature into a format that is readily available to academics and clinicians. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] This year, our panel of reviewers and editors included physicians from Australia, Canada, Ethiopia, Ghana, Laos, Rwanda, and the United States.Our group strives to identify the most relevant practice-changing articles, by scouring both the peerreviewed and the gray literature via a comprehensive search strategy. Gray literature has been defined as any material produced by an organization whose primary function is not peer-reviewed academic publication. 13Our goal in performing a gray literature search is to identify new global EM research conducted by government agencies, local or international nongovernmental organizations, or other entities that may not have been published in peer-reviewed journals.The primary goals of the review are to illustrate best practices, stimulate research, and promote further professionalization in the field of global EM through the identification of important new publications that focus on emergency care in the global context, especially emergency care provision in limited-resource settings, disaster and hum...

show abstract

Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2011

Cited by 18 publications

References 22 publications

Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2016

Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2016

A Framework and Methodology for Navigating Disaster and Global Health in Crisis Literature

Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2017

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About