Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBecker, Torben K.
dc.contributor.authorModi, Payal
dc.contributor.authorGlobal Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) Group
dc.date2022-08-11T08:08:17.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T15:49:34Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T15:49:34Z
dc.date.issued2018-05-23
dc.date.submitted2018-07-20
dc.identifier.citation<p>Acad Emerg Med. 2018 May 23. doi: 10.1111/acem.13456. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.13456">Link to article on publisher's site</a></p>
dc.identifier.issn1069-6563 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/acem.13456
dc.identifier.pmid29791967
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/28465
dc.description<p>Full list of authors omitted for brevity. For full list see article.</p>
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: 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 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. 63% were categorized as emergency care in resource-limited settings, 23% as disaster and humanitarian response, and 14% as emergency medicine development. 21 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.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=29791967&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a></p>
dc.relation.urlhttps://doi.org/10.1111/acem.13456
dc.subjectEmergency Medicine
dc.titleGlobal Emergency Medicine: A review of the literature from 2017
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleAcademic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/emed_pp/154
dc.identifier.contextkey12515751
html.description.abstract<p>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 global audience of academics and clinical practitioners.</p> <p>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.</p> <p>RESULTS: A total of 848 articles met our inclusion criteria and underwent full review. 63% were categorized as emergency care in resource-limited settings, 23% as disaster and humanitarian response, and 14% as emergency medicine development. 21 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.</p> <p>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.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathemed_pp/154
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Emergency Medicine


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record