Jul 03, 2025

Public workspaceCurricular Design Strategies in Disaster Medicine Education- A Scoping Review Protocol.

DOI
https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.kxygx4kwzl8j/v1
  • Hossam Hassan Yussef1,
  • Naglaa Mohamed Abdelhamied2,
  • Salma Abdalla Elmisbah3,
  • Abu Omayer2,
  • Mohamed Al Ali2,
  • Ives Hubloue4,5,
  • Nabil Zary2,
  • Azza Yousif6,
  • Azza Yousif7
  • 1Hatta Hospital, Dubai Health;
  • 2Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences;
  • 3Rashid Hospital, Dubai Health;
  • 4Emergency Department, UZ Brussel University Hospital;
  • 5Disaster Medicine Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB);
  • 6DUBAI HEALTH;
  • 7dubai health
Abu Omayer
Icon indicating open access to content
QR code linking to this content
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.kxygx4kwzl8j/v1
Protocol Citation: Hossam Hassan Yussef, Naglaa Mohamed Abdelhamied, Salma Abdalla Elmisbah, Abu Omayer, Mohamed Al Ali, Ives Hubloue, Nabil Zary, Azza Yousif, Azza Yousif 2025. Curricular Design Strategies in Disaster Medicine Education- A Scoping Review Protocol.. protocols.io https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.kxygx4kwzl8j/v1
License: This is an open access protocol distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License,  which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Protocol status: Working
We use this protocol and it's working
Created: July 01, 2025
Last Modified: July 03, 2025
Protocol Integer ID: 221380
Keywords: Disaster medicine, mass casualty incident, curriculum design, medical education, simulation training, emergency preparedness, healthcare professionals, competency-based training, hospital disaster education, mci training curricula across clinical setting, healthcare learner, mci training curricula, trained healthcare professional, available emergency resource, disaster, natural disaster, global evidence on disaster, synthesize curriculum, training program, clinical setting, casualty number, curricular design strategy, mci training, scoping review protocol introduction, healthcare professional, competency framework, teaching approach, scoping review, education, scoping review protocol, educational database, stakeholder consultation
Abstract
Introduction: Mass casualty incidents (MCIs), where casualty numbers exceed available emergency resources, are increasing worldwide due to natural disasters, terrorism, and pandemics. Effective response relies on well-trained healthcare professionals. Training programs, however, vary widely in design and delivery.

Purpose: This scoping review systematically maps global evidence on disaster and MCI training curricula across clinical settings.

Methods: Conduct the scoping review following the Arksey and O’Malley framework with Levac refinements and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Include studies published in English within the past 10 years that involve healthcare learners in prehospital or in-hospital disaster education. Search multiple medical and educational databases comprehensively. Synthesize curriculum features, teaching approaches, competency frameworks, and simulation use. Incorporate stakeholder consultation throughout the review process.
Guidelines
  1. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist.
  2. Arksey and O'Malley Scoping Review Framework.
  3. PRESS (Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies) guidelines.
Materials
Computers, Internet Connection, MS Word, MS Excel, Reference Manager (Mendeley/EndNote/Zotero), Covidence.
Troubleshooting
Objectives
Examine global literature on disaster and mass casualty incident (MCI) training curricula across all levels of prehospital and in-hospital care.
Identify the types of curricular design strategies used in MCI/disaster education for healthcare professionals, including paramedics, nurses, interns, residents, and physicians.
Describe the educational approaches and pedagogical methods employed (e.g., simulation, tabletop exercises, PBL).
Map the distribution of training programs across different educational settings (undergraduate, postgraduate, in-service).
Highlight innovations such as virtual reality (VR), interprofessional learning models, and community-integrated frameworks.
Identify common themes, competency frameworks, and specific skills addressed in curricula (e.g., triage, PPE, incident command).
Expose existing gaps in training content, target audience inclusion, and interdisciplinary coordination.
Inform future curriculum development and research to support comprehensive disaster preparedness across healthcare systems, not limited to medical first responders.
Methodology Overview
Follow the methodological framework established by Arksey and O'Malley, incorporating enhancements recommended by Levac et al.
Adhere to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines.
Develop and register the protocol on protocols.io.
Submit the protocol to appropriate international registries for systematic review protocols.
Stage 1: Identify the research questions
Primary research question:
How are disaster and mass casualty incident (MCI) training curricula designed and implemented across different healthcare professionals globally?

Secondary Research questions:
What types of educational settings (e.g., undergraduate, in-service) are used to deliver MCI training across healthcare professions?
Which healthcare roles (e.g., paramedics, nurses, residents, physicians) are targeted in disaster training programs, and how are curricula adapted for each group?
What pedagogical strategies and teaching methods (e.g., simulation, PBL, tabletop exercises) are commonly employed in MCI/disaster training curricula?
What types of curricular frameworks (e.g., competency-based, outcome-based) are used in disaster medicine education, and how are they applied?
Which disaster competency frameworks (e.g., WHO EMT Standards, NDLS, Core Competencies for Disaster Medicine) are referenced in training programs?
Which domains or themes (e.g., triage, logistics, leadership, communication) and specific competencies (e.g., PPE use, field triage, incident command) are emphasized in the curricula?
What types of MCI scenarios (e.g., earthquake, flood, chemical spill, pandemic) are used in training simulations or case exercises?
How are training modalities (e.g., in-person, online, hybrid) and pacing models (e.g., fixed schedule vs. self-paced) applied across different programs?
To what extent are simulation-based methods (e.g., tabletop, virtual) included in curricula, and what roles or tasks are assigned during these simulations?
How is pre-simulation preparation structured (e.g., videos, handouts), and are real-world scenarios integrated into the training design?
What assessment and evaluation methods (e.g., OSCE, pre/post tests, surveys) are used to measure learning outcomes, and what level of the Kirkpatrick framework do they reach
How is competency tracking implemented (e.g., checklists, e-Portfolios), if at all?
What outcomes, barriers, and success factors are reported in the implementation of these curricula?
What gaps remain in the current disaster/MCI curricula across healthcare training programs, and how might future programs be improved?
Scope: PCC (Population, Concept, Context) framework.
Population: Involve healthcare providers, including but not limited to physicians, nurses, paramedics, EMTs, residents, interns, university or college students enrolled in health-related fields (e.g., medicine, nursing, EMS).
Concept: Focus on curriculum structure, delivery methods, learning outcomes, or training modalities in disaster medicine or MCI training.
Context: Focus on disaster medicine or mass casualty incident (MCI) education and training.


Stage 2: Identify relevant studies
Databases: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar.
Create the search strategy using a combination of keywords and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), identified through the MeSH database on PubMed.



Keywords and MESH terms.
Submit the search strategy for peer review following the PRESS (Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies) guidelines to enhance accuracy and completeness.
Adapt the search strategy for each database: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov.




Search Strategies



Manually search Google Scholar to capture relevant studies missed in database searches and to identify grey literature.
Stage 3: Study selection
Include studies involving physicians, nurses, paramedics, EMTs, medical residents, medical interns, and university or college students enrolled in health-related fields (e.g., medicine, nursing, EMS).
Include studies that describe or evaluate curricular design strategies.
Focus on disaster medicine or mass casualty incident (MCI) education and training.
Include primary studies (quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods), program descriptions, and curriculum development reports.
Include grey literature such as conference abstracts or government/NGO reports if they provide relevant curriculum detail.
Restrict included studies to those published in English within the last 10 years.
Exclude studies that do not focus on disaster or MCI training (e.g., general emergency care or trauma surgery without a disaster context).

Exclude studies solely focused on effectiveness evaluations without describing curriculum structure or instructional design.
Exclude studies involving non-healthcare populations (e.g., military, engineers, general public) without separate analysis for healthcare participants.
Exclude systematic reviews, literature reviews, and other scoping reviews.
Stage 4: Data Charting
Develop the data extraction form by piloting 5 studies and identify common variables relevant to curricular design in disaster medicine education.
Study Identification and Context
  • Study ID
  • Country
  • Study Design
  • Target Population
  • Educational Setting
  • Prehospital Preparedness Focus
  • Location of Training
  • Duration of Training
Curriculum Structure and Design
  • Curriculum Type
  • Disaster Competency Framework Used
  • Frameworks/Standards Referenced
  • Key Themes or Domains
  • Specific Competencies Targeted
  • Program Success Characteristics
  • Was Study Objective Achieved?
Instructional Methods and Delivery
  • Training Method (Traditional/Technology-Based)
  • Delivery Modality
  • Pacing Model
  • Teaching Strategies
  • Use of Combined Training Methods (If Combined, List Methods)
  • Orientation Sessions Provided? If Yes, Topics Covered
  • Previous Experience of Participants
Simulation and Scenario Design
  • Simulation Included?
  • Simulation Type
  • Simulation Tasks Assigned
  • Real World Scenario Alignment
  • MCI Type Used in Scenario
  • Scenario Description
  • Were Risk Scenarios Assessed?
  • Actors' Occupation
  • Non-Medical Personnel Involved? If Yes, What Role?
  • Team Training Included
  • Response Team Role Assigned
Assessment and Evaluation
  • Assessment Methods
  • Effectiveness Metrics Used
  • Evaluation Level (Kirkpatrick)
  • Competency Tracking Used
  • Types of Self-Reported Measures
  • Was There a Comparator? If Yes, Name Comparator
  • Did Study Assess or Control for Stress?
  • Was There a Feedback Session?
Findings and Outcomes
  • Reported Outcomes/Effectiveness
  • Participants’ Positive Feedback
  • Participants’ Negative Feedback
  • Barriers/Challenges
  • Limitations of the Study
  • Gaps Identified
  • Success Factors/Best Practices
  • Key Message
Stage 5: Collate, summarize, and report the results.
Compile, summarize, and present extracted data from included studies using tables, figures, and other visual formats.
Analyze quantitative information (e.g., study frequencies, participant numbers, training formats) descriptively.
Examine qualitative data, including implementation experiences and contextual insights, using thematic analysis.
Use thematic analysis to categorize studies included in the review.
  • Curriculum structure and design approaches.
  • Educational setting and learner level (e.g., undergraduate, in-service).
  • Target healthcare populations (e.g., paramedics, nurses, physicians, students).
  • Instructional methods and pedagogical strategies (e.g., simulation, PBL, lectures).
  • Competency frameworks and disaster-specific standards referenced.
  • Assessment methods and evaluation levels (e.g., Kirkpatrick Model).
  • Use and types of simulation, including roles, tasks, and real-world alignment.
  • Reported outcomes, implementation barriers, gaps, and success factors.
Stage 6 (Optional): Conduct Stakeholder Consultation
Engage relevant stakeholders involved in disaster preparedness and emergency training as part of an optional consultation step.
Include participants such as EMS educators, emergency physicians, paramedics, disaster management officials, policymakers, and simulation specialists.
Dissemination
Submit the final manuscript to a peer-reviewed journal specializing in emergency medicine, disaster preparedness, or simulation-based training.
Present key results at leading national and international conferences
Timeline:
Month 1: Registration & stakeholder meeting
Months 2-3: Search execution & import
Months 4-5: Screening
Months 6-7: Data extraction
Month 8: Synthesis workshop
Month 9: Draft manuscript
Month 10: Peer review & protocols.io publication
Protocol references
Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005;8(1):19-32.
Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation Sci. 2010 Dec;5(1):69.
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467-473.
McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2016 Jul;75:40–6.