MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285033844 · doi:10.52609/jmlph.v2i3.54

Use of Ultrasound for Pre-hospital Care in Saudi Arabia: A National Survey

2022· article· en· W4285033844 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lujain Arafsha, Nizar Ahmed Bakhashwain, Wejdan Rahali, Sultan Alshali, Sohil Khaleel Saddiqi, Lama Maksood, Abdullah Alharbi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Medicine Law & Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic shortageMedicineObservational studyMedical emergencyEmergency medical servicesCross-sectional studyUltrasoundEmergency medicineFamily medicineGovernment (linguistics)Radiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND The use of pre-hospital ultrasound (U/S) in Saudi Arabia requires further elucidation. AIM We aim to assess the use of pre-hospital ultrasound, as well as its barriers and enablers, among emergency medical services (EMS) providers in Saudi Arabia. METHOD This is a cross-sectional observational study, based on a self-administered questionnaire distributed to emergency services personnel in Saudi Arabia between May and August 2022. RESULT 420 EMS providers responded to this survey. 55.5% (n=233) of them had a positive attitude towards using ultrasound in their practice, although about 81% (n=341) had no ultrasound training. Barriers to the implementation of ultrasound included the need for training, difficulty using ultrasound in an ambulance, case overload, and shortage of personnel, among others. CONCLUSION Our findings indicate that emergency care providers have a positive attitude towards the use of ultrasound in the pre-hospital setting. Saudi Arabian EMS should invest in training, raising awareness, and establishing or strengthening existing regulations in this regard.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Medicine Law & Public HealthSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207