MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120586198 · doi:10.12968/jpar.2011.3.7.376

The paramedic kairotope theory: findings

2011· article· en· W2120586198 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anthony Campeau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Paramedic Practice · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Health and Long Term Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombat Medical TechnicianEmergency Care PractitionerConceptualizationGrounded theoryAmbulance serviceMajor traumaTask (project management)Interpersonal communicationQualitative researchPsychologyField (mathematics)NursingMedical educationMedicineMedical emergencyContinuing professional developmentComputer scienceProfessional developmentSociologySocial psychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scene-management is an important, yet under-researched aspect of paramedic practice. Using a grounded theory methodology, this qualitative inquiry acquired data from in-depth interviews with paramedics working in rural, suburban, and urban settings in Ontario, Canada. The findings comprise a theory of how expert paramedics accomplish the very difficult task of managing emergency scenes, which is a crucial pre- and co-requisite for the provision of patient care. This theory introduces a new term, the ‘paramedic kairotope’ as a conceptualization of this expertise, comprised of knowing when and where to act in a field/clinical situation. The theory further describes this competency as being informed by two social processes: substantial use of interpersonal communication and innovative problem solving.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Paramedic PracticeSame topicLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesFrench-language works237,207