MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152391608 · doi:10.3109/10903127.2010.519818

Carbon Footprinting of North American Emergency Medical Services Systems

2010· article· en· W2152391608 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 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasInterquartile rangePopulationMedicineEmergency medical servicesEnvironmental healthEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to characterize the carbon emissions from a broad sample of North American emergency medical services (EMS) agencies, and to begin the process of establishing voluntary EMS-related emission targets. METHODS: Fifteen diverse North American EMS systems with more than 550,000 combined annual responses and serving a population of 6.3 million reported their direct and purchased ("Tier 2") energy consumption for one year. We calculated total carbon dioxide equivalent (CO(2)e) emissions using Environmental Protection Agency, Energy Information Administration, and locality-specific emission conversion factors. We also calculated per-response and population-based emissions. We report descriptive summary data. RESULTS: Participants included government "third-service" (n = 4), public utility model (n = 1), private contractor (n = 6), and rural rescue squad (n = 4) systems. Call volumes ranged from 800 to 114,280 (median 20,093; interquartile range [IQR] 1,100-55,217). Emissions totaled 46,941,690 pounds of CO(2)e (21,289 metric tons); 75% of emissions were from diesel or gasoline. For systems providing complete Tier 2 data, median emissions per response were 80.7 (IQR 65.1-106.5) pounds of CO(2)e and median emissions per service-area resident were 7.8 (IQR 4.7-11.2) pounds of CO(2)e. Two systems reported aviation fuel consumption for air medical services, with emissions of 2,395 pounds of CO(2)e per flight, or 0.7 pounds of CO(2)e per service-area resident. CONCLUSION: EMS operations produce substantial carbon emissions, primarily from vehicle-related fuel consumption. The 75th percentiles from our data suggest 106.5 pounds of CO(2)e per unit response and/or 11.2 pounds of CO(2)e per service-area resident as preliminary maximum emission targets. Air medical services can anticipate higher per-flight but lower population-based emissions.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.258 · 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