‘You’re not just a medical professional’: Exploring paramedic experiences of overdose response within Vancouver’s downtown eastside
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Overdose response has become an increasingly relevant component of paramedic practice, particularly in light of increased opioid overdose globally. Previous studies have noted gaps in our understanding regarding the unique challenges which paramedics face during this form of pre-hospital emergency care. The aim of this study is to explore and describe the ways in which paramedics experience overdose response, specifically within a community markedly affected by the overdose crisis. METHODS: Ten participants were recruited from a single ambulance station located in an urban center in Western Canada. Two rounds of semi-structured individual interviews were conducted, and data saturation was found to have been reached. Verbatim transcripts were produced and subject to two rounds of descriptive and pattern coding. A second researcher reviewed all of the codes, with disagreements being handled by discussion until agreement was obtained. Themes were identified, along with a Core Category which seeks to describe the underlying dynamics of overdose response represented in our data. The concept of a Core Category was borrowed from Grounded Theory methodology. FINDINGS: Five major themes were identified: Connecting with patients' lived experiences; Occupying roles as clinicians and patient advocates; Navigating on-scene hazards; Difficulties with transitions of care; and Emotional burden of the overdose crisis. A core category was identified as One's capacity to help. CONCLUSIONS: This research contributes to existing literature on overdose response by specifically examining paramedic experiences during this form of emergency care. While paramedics felt highly confident in providing clinical care, their capacity to address underlying causes of drug use was understood as much more limited. Participants found ways to address this lack of control, along with feelings of frustration, by trying to understand patient perspectives and adopting empathetic attitudes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".