Workplace Violence Process against Emergency Medical Services Staffs: A Grounded Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Workplace Violence (WPV) is an undesirable social phenomenon that threatens patients and staff safety and work environments. Despite the high prevalence of WPV and its serious consequences, limited studies have been conducted on its roots and formation in pre-hospital emergency. The aim of this study was to explore and explain the process of workplace violence against emergency medical service personnel. METHODS: This qualitative study was performed using grounded theory approach in 2015. The study participants included 17 Emergency Medical Service (EMS) staffs working in Tehran and Guilan provinces, Iran. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews and analyzed using the Strauss/Corbin approach and constant comparative method. The paradigm model of WPV is presented in this study. RESULTS: “Serving within the context of workplace violence” was presented as the main theory. Five main groups of paradigm model theory were identified as triggers, context, and intensifiers of violence, copying strategies, and outcomes. The important consequences of violence include physical and psychological health injury of staff in the process of service delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Despite their repeated exposure to violence and its consequences, EMS staffs usually fulfill their main role and perform their tasks. Training of stress management, familiarizing the community with the responsibilities of EMS, reducing response time, creating efficient communication systems, using appropriate facilities and manpower, training violence control, improving employees’ job satisfaction, and coordinating cooperation with the police can reduce workplace violence. The supporting of the WPV victims is essential to improve the health and safety of EMS staff.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".