Perceptions of Emergency Management in Members of Reciprocal Organizations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context Reciprocal agreements allow members of both the Board of Certification and the Canadian Athletic Therapy Association to practice after passing the certification exams. For both, there is an initial baseline level of emergency management (EM) knowledge. A high level of decay among skills and knowledge occurs when not used or reviewed. Objective The purpose of this study was to identify a definition of EM as well as themes relating to perspectives on EM maintenance requirements in athletic trainers and athletic therapists, as these appear to be absent from the current research base. Design Qualitative study. Setting Individual interviews. Patients or Other Participants A purposeful sampling method recruited 10 participants (5 from Canada and 5 from the United States; 4 men and 6 women; 4 academics and 6 clinicians; 2 to 35 years of experience) with content expertise in EM. Data Collection and Analysis The primary investigator conducted interviews, which were recorded, transcribed, and checked for accuracy. Interviews were evaluated through consensual qualitative analysis for themes, subthemes, and quotes. Triangulation occurred, and data saturation was reached by the tenth interview. Results Four main themes emerged: (1) a definition of EM, (2) EM as a foundational skill, (3) efforts to gain and maintain knowledge and skills, and (4) perceptions regarding requiring a higher-level certification. We have identified a thematic definition of EM and established EM as a foundational skill set. Participants emphasized practice for gaining and maintaining proficiencies in EM; however, no consensus on higher-level certification was reached. Conclusions With the thematic definition of EM identified, the focus shifts to investigating effects of personal practice on knowledge and skill levels. This study found that recertification timelines exceed timelines for knowledge and skill decay. Clinicians and academics agree that frequent personal practice is preferred over formal continuing education for maintenance of best practice.
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 | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".