Pediatric Disaster Medicine Literature: A Scoping Review

Introduction: Over the last 20 years disasters have increasingly involved children, and pediatric disaster medicine research is growing. However, this research is largely reactive, has not been categorized in terms of the disaster cycle, and the quality of the research is variable. To understand the gaps in current literature and highlight areas for future research, we conducted a scoping review of pediatric disaster medicine literature. This work will help create recommendations for future pediatric disaster medicine research. Method: Using a published framework for scoping reviews, we worked with a medical librarian and a multi-institutional team to define the research question, develop eligibility criteria, and to identify a search strategy. We conducted a comprehensive Medline search from 2001-2022, which was distributed to nine reviewers. Each article was independently screened for inclusion by two reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. Inclusion criteria included articles published in English, related to all stages of the disaster cycle, and disaster education, focused on or included pediatric populations; published in academic, peer-reviewed journals, and policies from professional societies. Results: 967 pediatric disaster medicine articles were imported for screening and 35 duplicates were removed. 932 articles were screened for relevance and 109 were excluded. In 2000, three articles met inclusion criteria and 66 in 2021. We noticed reactive spikes in the number of articles after major disasters. Most articles focused on preparedness and response, with only a few articles on recovery, mitigation, and prevention. Methodology used for most studies was either qualitative or retrospective. Most were single site studies and there were < 10 meta-analyses over the 20 years. Conclusion: This scoping review describes the trends in and quality of existing pediatric disaster medicine literature. By identifying the gaps in this body of literature, we can better prioritize future research.