Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Becker, Torben K.
• Bartels, Susan
• Hansoti, Bhakti
• Jacquet, Gabrielle A.
• Lunney, Kevin
• Marsh, Regan
• Osei‐Ampofo, Maxwell
• Lam, Christopher
• Levine, Adam C.
• Hauswald, Mark
• Anderson, Eleanor
• Aschkenasy, Miriam
• Balhara, Kamna S.
• Bisanzo, Mark
• Black, Aislinn
• Boyd, Michael
• Chan, Jennifer
• Ekernas, Karen
• Grover, Emily
• Hayward, Alison S.
• Hexom, Braden
• Jenson, Alexander
• Kearney, Alexis
• Kestler, Andrew
• Kayden, Stephanie
• Li, Xiaoguang
• Mahal, Jacqueline
• Millikan, Daniel J.
• Modi, Payal
• Nguyen, Tu Carol
• Periyanayagam, Usha
• Rahman, Najeeb
• Schroeder, Erika D.
• Selvam, Anand
• Silvestri, David
• Titze, Sabrina
• Trehan, Indi
• Welzel, Tyson B.

Titel

Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2014

Ist Teil von

• Academic emergency medicine, 2015-08, Vol.22 (8), p.976-984

Ort / Verlag

United States: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc

Erscheinungsjahr

2015

Quelle

Wiley-Blackwell Journals

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Objectives The Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) conducts an annual search of peer‐reviewed and gray literature relevant to global emergency medicine (EM) to identify, review, and disseminate the most important new research in this field to a worldwide audience of academics and clinical practitioners. Methods This year 6,376 articles written in six 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. A total of 477 articles were deemed appropriate by at least one reviewer and approved by the editor for formal scoring of overall quality and importance. Results Of the 477 articles that met our predetermined inclusion criteria, 63% were categorized as emergency care in resource‐limited settings, 13% as EM development, and 23% as disaster and humanitarian response. Twenty‐five articles received scores of 17.5 or higher and were selected for formal summary and critique. Inter‐rater reliability for two reviewers using our scoring system was good, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.657 (95% confidence interval = 0.589 to 0.713). Studies and reviews focusing on infectious diseases, trauma, and the diagnosis and treatment of diseases common in resource‐limited settings represented the majority of articles selected for final review. Conclusions In 2014, there were fewer total articles, but a slightly higher absolute number of articles screening in for formal scoring, when compared to the 2013 review. The number of EM development articles decreased, while the number of disaster and humanitarian response articles increased. As in prior years, the majority of articles focused on infectious diseases and trauma.