MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412709521 · doi:10.1186/s12913-025-13196-5

Barriers to paramedic professionalisation: a qualitative enquiry across the UK, Canada, Australia, USA and the republic of Ireland

2025· article· en· W4412709521 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fintan Feerick, Eoin Coughlan, Shane Knox, Ivan O Grady, Conor Deasy

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursing researchHealth informaticsHealth administrationMedicinePublic healthHealth services researchQualitative researchNursingQuality of Life ResearchFamily medicineSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Paramedicine is undergoing a transformative shift as practitioners seek recognition beyond traditional emergency response roles toward being fully integrated healthcare professionals. Central to this evolution is the process of professionalisation, marked by efforts to expand scope of practice, formalise education and regulation, and achieve greater systemic integration. Despite these developments, significant barriers remain. PURPOSE: This study explores key barriers to the professionalisation of paramedics across five developed healthcare systems, highlighting shared and context-specific challenges. METHODS: A qualitative study underpinned by a critical theory paradigm was conducted using semi-structured interviews. Over a five-month period (Dec 2022-Apr 2023), 15 expert stakeholders from clinical, educational, policy, and leadership roles in paramedicine and pre-hospital emergency care were recruited across five countries. Interviews were conducted via Microsoft Teams, transcribed verbatim, and analysed thematically with a reflexive and interpretive approach. RESULTS: Four main themes were developed: Current Barriers to Expansion- including outdated legislation, inconsistent regulatory frameworks, limited funding, workforce shortages, and insufficient integration within healthcare systems. Elevating Professional Status- focusing on the need for protected titles, standardised education, credentialing, and a stronger professional identity. Impact of COVID-19- participants reflected on the profession's temporary visibility during the pandemic, followed by policy and funding shifts that diluted that momentum. Future Continuing and Emerging Barriers- encompassing structural and cultural resistance, lack of leadership pathways, and challenges in sustaining innovation and collaboration. CONCLUSION: The study highlights persistent barriers to paramedic professionalisation, including fragmented regulation, uneven educational standards, and systemic underinvestment. Although COVID-19 demonstrated the adaptability and potential of the profession, sustaining progress requires targeted policy reform, stronger regulatory frameworks, investment in education and leadership, and commitment to workforce development. Recognising paramedics as integral healthcare providers is essential to advancing the profession and improving patient care.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.422 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services ResearchSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207