What question did this study set out to answer?

The aim is to map the structure and approaches of disaster and mass casualty education curricula in healthcare settings.

July 19, 2026Open Access

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

NANaglaa Mohamed AbdelhamiedDubai Health Authority AOAbu OmayerMohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences SESalma Abdalla ElmisbahDubai Health Authority

Key Points

The aim is to map the structure and approaches of disaster and mass casualty education curricula in healthcare settings.
Conducted a scoping review following Arksey and O'Malley's framework.
Reviewed literature from multiple databases, including PubMed and CINAHL, from 2015 to 2025.
Sixty studies were curated for analysis, focusing on curriculum structure and evaluation.
Included 41 studies with various curriculum structures: stand-alone (34.1%), embedded (39.0%), longitudinal (9.8%), and model proposals (17.1%).
Outcome evaluation primarily focused on lower levels of Moore's Framework, with 53.7% assessing satisfaction and 12.2% evaluating real-world performance.
Only 14.6% of studies targeted interprofessional learner groups, indicating a need for more collaborative approaches.

Abstract

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.

Ask AI

Helpful

Bookmark

View Full Paper