MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387235709 · doi:10.1136/emermed-2023-999.17

PP18 The role of the rotational paramedic in primary care

2023· article· en· W4387235709 on OpenAlexaff
Georgette Eaton, Stephanie Tierney, Geoff Wong, Jason Oke, Veronika Williams, Kamal R Mahtani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary careWorkforceScope of practiceMedicineMedical emergencyPresentation (obstetrics)Emergency medical servicesMajor traumaFamily medicineNursingHealth carePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Over the last decade, paramedics in the United Kingdom (UK) have increasingly taken up clinical employment away from ambulance services, with many moving into primary care settings. Reasons for this move are multifactorial and interwoven. However, in an effort to retain the paramedic workforce, rotational roles between ambulance services and primary care providers have been initiated. Methods An online survey was distributed via the College of Paramedics to paramedics in primary care in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. The survey utilised both qualitative and quantitative items to better understand the scope of role undertaken by paramedics in NHS primary care and explore the perceptions paramedics in primary care have on their contribution to primary care teams. This presentation will focus on the results relevant to paramedics who rotate between ambulance services and primary care settings only. Results The survey was completed by 341 paramedics. Of these, 10% worked one day a week in a rotational role. The most common job title was Advanced Paramedic Practitioner (44%) or First contact Practitioner (25%), though other job titles were also reported. Of particular note is the correlation between hours worked and attending presentations such as catastrophic haemorrhage (rs=.109, p=.044), anaphylaxis (rs=.127, p=.019), angioedema (rs =.140, p=.009), seizures (rs =.147, p=.007), and overdose/poisoning (rs =.200, p=<.001), where respondents who worked in a rotational role attended these presentations to a greater extent. Conclusion The survey highlighted the variety of work that paramedics in rotational roles undertook in primary care, however paramedics in these roles attended emergency presentations in primary care to a greater extent when compared to their full-time counterparts. Whilst the ability for paramedics to attend emergency presentations in primary care may be a benefit for primary care providers, this does little to develop their primary care clinical acumen.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies→French-language works237,207→