Substance Use and the Paramedic Role: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: As the paramedic profession continues to grow and evolve, a shift from reactive to holistic patient care models is required. As the first and often the only point of medical contact for many patients from marginalized and under-served populations, the paramedic role, and its potential future implications in caring for these patients needs to be explored. Aim: The objective of this scoping review was to explore the paramedic's role in caring for people who use illicit drugs. Methods: A scoping review of English language literature published since 2002 was conducted using CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. We used a previously published paramedic search term filter for sensitivity combined with search terms related to drug-related substance use and addiction. Studies were selected based on relevance to the research question. Results: A total of 104 peer-reviewed and 14 grey literature articles were selected for inclusion. The main finding of this scoping review is the notable lack of evidence base surrounding the contemporary paramedic role in the care provision of people who use drugs (PWUD). The results highlight high rates of mortality following a paramedic-attended drug poisoning event, presenting a unique opportunity for paramedics to intervene in meaningful ways that extend past traditional drug poisoning response. Conclusions: The interface between the community of PWUD and the paramedic may be a highly influential encounter during a patient's journey through the healthcare system. The evolving role of the paramedic in this encounter requires focused study and should be viewed as a research priority in response to the ongoing drug poisoning crisis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".