MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294752510 · doi:10.1111/hsc.13985

The development of community paramedicine; a restricted review

2022· review· en· W4294752510 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brendan Shannon, Georgette Eaton, Chelsea Lanos, Matthew Leÿenaar, Mike Nolan, Kelly‐Ann Bowles, Brett Williams, Peter O’Meara, Gary Wingrove, JD Heffern, Alan M Batt

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth & Social Care in the Community · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsGovernment of CanadaGovernment of Prince Edward Island
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsScope (computer science)Grey literatureMedicineCorporate governanceMEDLINENursingHealth careMedical educationPolitical scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community paramedic roles are expanding internationally, and no review of the literature could be found to guide services in the formation of community paramedicine programmes. For this reason, the aim of this restricted review was to explore and better understand the successes and learnings of community paramedic programmes across five domains being; education requirements, models of delivery, clinical governance and supervision, scope of roles and outcomes. This restricted review was conducted by searching four databases (CENTRAL, ERIC, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Google Scholar) as well as grey literature search from 2001 until 28/12/2021. After screening, 98 articles were included in the narrative synthesis. Most studies were from the USA (n = 37), followed by Canada (n = 29). Most studies reported on outcomes of community paramedicine programmes (n = 50), followed by models of delivery (n = 28). The findings of this review demonstrate a lack of research and understanding in the areas of education and scope of the role for community paramedics. The findings highlight a need to develop common approaches to education and scope of role while maintaining flexibility in addressing community needs. There was an observable lack of standardisation in the implementation of governance and supervision models, which may prevent community paramedicine from realising its full potential. The outcome measures reported show that there is evidence to support the implementation of community paramedicine into healthcare system design. Community paramedicine programmes result in a net reduction in acute healthcare utilisation, appear to be economically viable and result in positive patient outcomes with high patient satisfaction with care. There is a developing pool of evidence to many aspects of community paramedicine programmes. However, at this time, gaps in the literature prevent a definitive recommendation on the impact of community paramedicine programmes on healthcare system functionality.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.271
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations51
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth & Social Care in the CommunitySame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207