MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6924994165 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/sytxf

Emergency medical services - prehospital triage by registered nurses: scoping review

2023· article· en· W6924994165 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriageCINAHLCochrane LibraryMEDLINEHealth careEmergency medical servicesTelemedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

objective Identify and synthesize scientific evidence on the best conduct in the practice of telephone triage carried out by nurses in the Mobile Emergency Care Service. Formulation of research questions P (Participants) – Care for people in the mobile pre-hospital service. C (Concept) – Telephone triage carried out by a nurse C (Context) - Mobile Emergency Care Service. What should telephone triage carried out by a nurse in a pre-hospital emergency be carried out? What are the best behaviors that guide the effective practice of telephone triage by nurses in the Mobile Emergency Care Service? carry out telephone pre-hospital emergencies? Inclusion and exclusion criteria Will be included: articles, dissertations and theses published in any language, with summaries available in full in selected databases or catalogs of dissertations and theses, which address telephone triage in pre-hospital emergencies. Time limit, from Ordinance No. 1,600, of July 7, 2011; which reformulates the National Emergency Care Policy and establishes the Emergency Care Network in the Unified Health System (SUS), that is, from 2011. The following will be excluded: conference proceedings, comments, editorials, opinions, preliminary notes, reports, single case studies. Data collect The electronic databases MEDLINE (International Literature in Health Sciences) will be used via PUBMED (National Library of Medicine and National Institutes of Health), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences), CINAHL ( Cummulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), SCOPUS, EMBASE, Information Science Abstracts (LISA) and in Information Science and Technology Abstracts (ISTA), Web of Science and the Cochrane library. And in gray literature: - CAPES Theses and Dissertations Catalog - DART-Europe E-Theses Portal - Electronic Theses Online Service (EThOS) - Portuguese Open Access Scientific Repository (RCAAP) - National ETD Portal - Theses Canada - Latin American Thesis Portal - World Cat Dissertations and Theses. Identification of descriptors and keywords Descriptors and keywords used in studies that address the topic of interest based on the combination of MeSH identified for the research mneumonic: (Emergency Medical Services) OR (Ambulances) OR (Emergency Mobile Units) AND (Telephone) OR (Cell Phone Use) OR (Telemedicine Emergency Care) OR (Telemedicine) OR (Triage) AND (Nursing) OR (Nurse)

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4660.436

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.320 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueOSF Preprints (OSF Preprints)Same topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207