MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894277042 · doi:10.32378/ijp.v3i2.135

Defining Mentorship in Prehospital Care: A Qualitative Analysis of the Characteristics of Prehospital Mentors

2018· article· en· W2894277042 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cheryl Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueIrish Journal of Paramedicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsAlberta HealthUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNominationMentorshipThematic analysisMedicinePsychologyMedical educationQualitative researchPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p><strong>Introduction</strong></p><p><span>This study sought to begin to define the current understanding of the term mentor within the prehospital environment (emergency medical services or EMS) as described by nomination letters written by mentees for a newly launched prehospital mentor award.</span><br /><br /><strong>Methods</strong></p><p><span>The John Ross Paramedic Mentor Award was created in the fall of 2015 to recognize outstanding mentors in prehospital care. In the spring of 2016, nineteen nomination letters were received from registered prehospital professionals in Alberta detailing why their mentor should receive the mentor award. Written text from the nominations for this peer nominated award were analyzed using thematic and content analysis (n=19) to identify the current understanding of mentorship in EMS, desirable qualities of prehospital mentors, and what a successful mentoring relationship looks like in the prehospital environment from the perspective of mentees. Demographic data of the mentees and mentors were obtained. </span><br /><br /><strong>Results</strong></p><p><span>Mentees and nominated mentors had varying years of experience, worked in diverse practice areas within prehospital care and represented varying scopes of practice (PCPs and ACPs). Three themes were identified from thematic analysis of the nomination letters 1) nominators seek to emulate their mentors, 2) mentors create a safe and nurturing environment, and 3) mentors act as advocates. In addition, content analysis was used to identify a number of desirable professional and personal traits of prehospital mentors.</span><br /><br /><strong>Conclusion</strong></p><p><span>This study describes the qualities of prehospital mentors and identifies a number of common elements in a successful mentoring relationship (from the perspective of the mentee). These results highlight exceptional mentoring that is already occurring within the prehospital care environment. This research has the potential to provide guidance to those who aim to support both formal and informal mentoring within the prehospital care environment.</span></p>

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.432 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIrish Journal of ParamedicineSame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207