Reframing disaster simulation as a translational systems intervention: a design-based comparative analysis of MRMI and the Emergo Train System (ETS)

Abstract Background Disaster simulation is central to emergency preparedness; however, many simulation designs insufficiently represent disasters as prolonged, system-disruptive, and ethically complex events. Exercises frequently emphasize mass-casualty throughput, rely on simplified assumptions, and evaluate success primarily in terms of task completion rather than system performance and organizational learning. This study examines how disaster simulation design shapes preparedness outcomes and explores how simulation may be reframed as a translational systems intervention. Methods A qualitative design-based research approach was used to conduct an inductive comparative framework analysis of two established disaster simulation paradigms: Medical Response to Major Incident (MRMI) and the Emergo Train System (ETS). Documentary sources included curricula, instructional materials, scenario templates, published evaluations, disaster evidence literature, and World Health Organization Emergency Medical Team standards. Simulation design features were extracted and compared using constant comparative analysis, and the findings were subsequently interpreted through socio-technical systems and resilience engineering perspectives. Results Four recurrent design-level tensions were identified using harmonized terminology: (1) divergent disaster conceptualization (governable surge versus unstable system disruption); (2) fidelity emphasis imbalance (cognitive versus behavioral realism); (3) incident-centric temporal framing; and (4) inconsistent translation into organizational learning. Published evaluation reports suggest that MRMI may support governance alignment and coordinated surge reasoning, whereas ETS may provide greater operational realism and more opportunities to expose teamwork under stress. Neither paradigm alone appears to fully address all design requirements relevant to sustained disaster-level system resilience. Conclusions MRMI and ETS appear complementary but individually incomplete. A staged hybrid architecture integrating governance modeling, operational stress testing, longitudinal degradation modeling, and structured reflective translation is proposed as a design-oriented framework. This framework may help position disaster simulation as a translational systems intervention that connects exercise performance to potentially measurable organizational preparedness and system resilience, while still requiring empirical validation in practical settings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Emergency Medicine
Published
2026-07-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-026-01699-1
Primary Topic
Disaster Response and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reframing disaster simulation as a translational systems intervention: a design-based comparative analysis of MRMI and the Emergo Train System (ETS)

Carlström Eric, Khorram-Manesh Amir
BMC Emergency Medicine
Disaster Response and Management
article

Reframing disaster simulation as a translational systems intervention: a design-based comparative analysis of MRMI and the Emergo Train System (ETS)

Carlström Eric, Khorram-Manesh Amir
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Disaster simulation is central to emergency preparedness; however, many simulation designs insufficiently represent disasters as prolonged, system-disruptive, and ethically complex events. Exercises frequently emphasize mass-casualty throughput, rely on simplified assumptions, and evaluate success primarily in terms of task completion rather than system performance and organizational learning. This study examines how disaster simulation design shapes preparedness outcomes and explores how simulation may be reframed as a translational systems intervention. Methods A qualitative design-based research approach was used to conduct an inductive comparative framework analysis of two established disaster simulation paradigms: Medical Response to Major Incident (MRMI) and the Emergo Train System (ETS). Documentary sources included curricula, instructional materials, scenario templates, published evaluations, disaster evidence literature, and World Health Organization Emergency Medical Team standards. Simulation design features were extracted and compared using constant comparative analysis, and the findings were subsequently interpreted through socio-technical systems and resilience engineering perspectives. Results Four recurrent design-level tensions were identified using harmonized terminology: (1) divergent disaster conceptualization (governable surge versus unstable system disruption); (2) fidelity emphasis imbalance (cognitive versus behavioral realism); (3) incident-centric temporal framing; and (4) inconsistent translation into organizational learning. Published evaluation reports suggest that MRMI may support governance alignment and coordinated surge reasoning, whereas ETS may provide greater operational realism and more opportunities to expose teamwork under stress. Neither paradigm alone appears to fully address all design requirements relevant to sustained disaster-level system resilience. Conclusions MRMI and ETS appear complementary but individually incomplete. A staged hybrid architecture integrating governance modeling, operational stress testing, longitudinal degradation modeling, and structured reflective translation is proposed as a design-oriented framework. This framework may help position disaster simulation as a translational systems intervention that connects exercise performance to potentially measurable organizational preparedness and system resilience, while still requiring empirical validation in practical settings.

BMC Emergency Medicine
Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE), University of Gothenburg (SE)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Disaster Response and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.