Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Acad Emerg Med. 2015 Aug;22(8):976-84. doi: 10.1111/acem.12733. Epub 2015 Jul 29.

Global emergency medicine: a review of the literature from 2014.

Author information

1
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
2
Department of Emergency Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
3
Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, Cambridge, MA.
4
Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
5
Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA.
6
Boston University Center for Global Health and Development, Boston, MA.
7
Medical Corps, US Navy, Department of Emergency Medicine, Navy Hospital Camp Lejeune, Camp Lejeune, NC.
8
Department of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.
9
Partners In Health, Boston, MA.
10
Accident & Emergency Department, Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital and Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.
11
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI.
12
Department of Emergency Medicine, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI.

Abstract

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.

PMID:
26223901
DOI:
10.1111/acem.12733
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center