Clinical Performance Feedback to Paramedics: What They Receive and What They Need
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: Performance feedback is not always well utilized in healthcare. To more effectively incorporate it, we used a discussion of current feedback systems to explore paramedics' perceived needs regarding feedback and to understand what feedback would improve their performance as healthcare providers. METHODS: We used a qualitative methodology with semistructured interviews of paramedics to explore perceptions and desires for feedback. Interpretive descriptive analysis was performed with continuous recruitment until thematic saturation was achieved. Themes were identified and a coding system was developed by two investigators separately and merged by consensus. The analysis was audited by a third investigator, and a member check was performed. RESULTS: Many different ideas were discussed that were analyzed to develop several major recurrent themes. One such theme was positive perception of feedback by paramedics. Despite the positive perceptions discussed, the shortcomings of current systems were also frequently discussed as were perceived barriers to receiving meaningful feedback. The idea of following up on patients' courses/outcomes also arose frequently during the interviews. In addition, feedback and its interaction with mental health emerged as a theme in terms of its potential for both positive and negative impact. Finally, suggestions about the future were also common with paramedics providing thoughts regarding what future systems could be developed or what changes could be made to provide them with meaningful feedback. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show how paramedics perceive feedback, but still note how barriers may impair its uptake and how it may affect their mental health. Our participants also made recommendations about what they would want to see in future feedback systems. This information can provide the foundation to improve current feedback systems or structure new ones to allow paramedics to continue to develop themselves as healthcare professionals.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle