MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076999248 · doi:10.12968/ippr.2011.1.2.63

Paramedic clinical decision-making: results of two Canadian studies

2011· article· en· W2076999248 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jan Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Paramedic Practice · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical decision makingOutcome (game theory)Clinical judgmentClinical PracticePsychologyMedical emergencyMedicineMedical educationNursingIntensive care medicineMedical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paramedics make many decisions while caring for patients in the out-of-hospital setting, including clinical judgments, such as assessment, treatment and transport decisions. As the decisions paramedics make can have an impact on patient safety and clinical outcome, it is important to focus on which clinical decisions are most important, when paramedics are required these, and how paramedics make clinical decisions, that is, what thinking strategies they rely on. This article will present the results of two recent Canadian studies, and will discuss the implications for paramedic clinical practice, education and research on this topic.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Paramedic PracticeSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207