P3.064: Pediatric Disaster Medicine Literature in the early 21st Century: a scoping review

Background: Pediatric disaster medicine (PDM) is a broad and relatively young field in the academic literature that addresses the considerations and nuances of caring for children and families during a disaster. Over the last 24 years, PDM has become a more prevalent field of research within pediatrics. To date, there has not been a large-scale review of the academic literature in PDM. A scoping review methodology was used to accomplish the following goals: 1) To identify trends in the number of PDM publications, study types, sources of funding, and types and phases of disasters over a 24 year period.; 2) To determine whether high profile disasters correlate with the number and type of PDM publications.

Methods: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Review (PRISMA) published framework, a multidisciplinary team developed eligibility criteria for articles and identified a search strategy which was refined using published frameworks for scoping reviews. Inclusion criteria were articles published in English, related to any stage of the disaster cycle and/or disaster education, focused on or included pediatric populations; published in academic, peer-reviewed journals, articles on hospital and pre-hospital operations that affected or may have affected the pediatric population, and policies from professional societies. Articles we screened and sorted by which phase of the disaster cycle (preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation/prevention) they were most applicable. Articles focused on education were identified and categorized. The extraction process included a full-text review and determination of key elements (study year, study types, study design, sources of funding, and characteristics of disaster(s) referenced in the article).

Results: Nine hundred eighty-three PDM articles were screened. After screening removed duplicates and articles deemed irrelevant by expert review, a total of 728 studies published over a 24-year period were included in the review. There was a significant increase in the number of pediatric disaster medicine related publications per year starting after 2005. The majority of studies focused on preparedness and response phases of the disaster cycle. There was a relative paucity of studies on recovery, mitigation/prevention, and education. There were only 8 studies that addressed all four phases of the disaster cycle. There was a general upward trend in the number of prospective, retrospective, and review publications as well as a trend towards fewer policy, text, and opinion publications since the start of the scoping review period. Approximately one third of the publications had a listed funding source. The majority of those funded (65%) were through federal sources.

Conclusion: PDM continues to grow as exemplified by the steadily increasing number of yearly publications. Gaps in knowledge and study were identified allowing for the establishment and prioritization of an agenda for future research.