MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048039615 · doi:10.1080/10903120590891679

MEASURING THE EMS PATIENT ACCESS TIME INTERVAL andTHE IMPACT OF RESPONDING TO HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS

2005· article· en· W2048039615 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePrehospital Emergency Care · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCrewConfidence intervalEmergency medical servicesInterval (graph theory)TechnicianEmergency medicineMedical emergencyPercentilePrioritizationObservational studyInternal medicineStatisticsAeronautics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To measure the patient access time interval and characterize its contribution to the total emergency medical services (EMS) response time interval; to compare the patient access time intervals for patients located three or more floors above ground with those less than three floors above or below ground, and specifically in the apartment subgroup; and to identify barriers that significantly impede EMS access to patients in high-rise apartments. METHODS: An observational study of all patients treated by an emergency medical technician paramedics (EMT-P) crew was conducted using a trained independent observer to collect time intervals and identify potential barriers to access. RESULTS: Of 118 observed calls, 25 (21%) originated from patients three or more floors above ground. The overall median and 90th percentile (95% confidence interval) patient access time intervals were 1.61 (1.27, 1.91) and 3.47 (3.08, 4.05) minutes, respectively. The median interval was 2.73 (2.22, 3.03) minutes among calls from patients located three or more stories above ground compared with 1.25 (1.07, 1.55) minutes among those at lower levels. The patient access time interval represented 23.5% of the total EMS response time interval among calls originating less than three floors above or below ground and 32.2% of those located three or more stories above ground. The most frequently encountered barriers to access included security code entry requirements, lack of directional signs, and inability to fit the stretcher into the elevator. CONCLUSIONS: The patient access time interval is significantly long and represents a substantial component of the total EMS response time interval, especially among ambulance calls originating three or more floors above ground. A number of barriers appear to contribute to delayed paramedic access.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it