MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965650883 · doi:10.1101/19003491

The effects of stress on the driving abilities of paramedic students: a pilot, simulator-based study

2019· preprint· en· W2965650883 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor Hines Duncliffe, Brittany D’Angelo, Michael Brock, Cal Fraser, Jake Lamarra, Nick Austin, Matt Pusateri, Alan M Batt

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsFanshawe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDriving simulatorAffect (linguistics)PsychologyPopulationStress (linguistics)MedicineCognitionApplied psychologySimulationMedical emergencyComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Previous research has suggested that stress may have a negative effect on the clinical performance of paramedics. In addition, stress has been demonstrated to have a negative impact the driving abilities of the general population, increasing the number of driving errors. However, to date no studies have explored stress and its potential impact on non-clinical performance of paramedics, particularly their driving abilities. Methods Paramedic students underwent emergency driving assessment in a driving simulator before and after exposure to a stressful medical scenario. Number and type of errors were documented before and after by both driving simulator software and observation by two observers from the research team. The NASA Task Load Index (TLX) was utilised to record self-reported stress levels. Results 36 students participated in the study. Following exposure to a stressful medical scenario, paramedic students demonstrated no increase in overall error rate, but demonstrated an increase in three critical driving errors, namely failure to wear a seatbelt (3 baseline v 10 post stress), failing to stop for red lights or stop signs (7 v 35), and losing control of the vehicle (2 v 11). Self-reported stress levels also increased after the clinical scenario, particularly in the area of mental (cognitive) demand. Conclusion Paramedics are routinely exposed to acute stress in their everyday work, and this stress could affect their non-clinical performance. The critical errors committed by participants in this study closely matched those considered to be contributory factors in many ambulance collisions. These results stimulate the need for further research into the effects of stress on non-clinical performance in general, and highlight the potential need to consider additional driver training and stress management education in order to mitigate the frequency and severity of driving errors. Key points Paramedics are exposed to stressful clinical scenarios during the course of their work Many critical and serious clinical calls require transport to hospital Ambulance crashes occur regularly and pose a significant risk to the safety and wellbeing of both patients and paramedics This simulated clinical scenario followed by a simulated driving scenario has highlighted that stress appears to affect driving abilities in paramedic students The findings of this study, although conducted in paramedic students in simulated environments, highlight the need to further investigate the effects of stress on driving abilities among paramedics

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.383 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicOccupational Health and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207