The treatment of potential spine injuries by emergency personnel in the prehospital setting
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: The standard of care for the treatment of potential spine injuries by emergency personnel in the prehospital setting has evolved in recent years. Current practice, however, varies widely, and evidence supporting individual approaches is limited. It remains unclear how new treatment protocols have been applied and how the attitudes of frontline providers influence their care. Additional questions about identifying and preventing additional traumatic spinal cord injury require detailed data that have been rarely reported, partly due to prehospital data-quality challenges. This manuscript-style dissertation aims to describe and analyze patterns of care, attitudes of paramedics to spinal precautions, and the landscape of data quality assessment practices in paramedic research. Methods: Patterns of treatment over the period of protocol changes were investigated in a retrospective database review of electronic patient care reports from the Winnipeg Fire Paramedic Service (WFPS). Attitudes of frontline providers were assessed in a cross-sectional survey of paramedics in the WFPS. To describe the landscape of data quality assessment practices in paramedic research, a scoping review protocol was developed and then applied according to established standards. Results: The rate of treatment with spinal precautions has decreased significantly since 2009, with accompanying changes to several specific elements of care, such as patient positioning and choice of devices. Survey findings indicate that respondents feel that spinal precautions are seen as less important than in the past, that they are treating fewer patients than previously, and that they follow protocol in most situations. A review of data quality assessment practices analyzed 97 articles that met inclusion criteria. Included studies varied widely in many characteristics, but summary findings identify challenges and potential areas for progress in supporting data quality in paramedic research. Conclusions: This thesis illustrates changing patterns of care during the period of protocol revision, accompanied by complex and nuanced attitudes on the part of paramedics towards their practice. These findings update our understanding of how paramedics treat potential spine injuries in the prehospital setting. Additional findings establish the landscape of data quality assessment practices in paramedic research as a necessary precursor to continuing work to link prehospital and in-hospital records.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».