Enhancing professional practice and professionalism among Canadian rural paramedics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The scope of paramedic practice is being redefined and expanded. Professional development and clinical expertise are not only necessary for paramedics to perform their clinical functions and operational responsibilities, they are at the very core of their professionalisation. Professionalisation is a complex process, and the degree to which it can accomplished will impact society’s perception of the profession – and its trust in it – for years to come. This study investigated ways to enhance professional practice, from the point of view of the main healthcare providers in a rural area of Ontario, Canada. Methods A qualitative analysis informed by action research methodology was used. The research design was staged and consisted of focus groups and a World Café. The data were coded and organised into themes, using thematic analysis, and were triangulated with the literature. Results Three key themes emerged from the World Café and focus group conversations including current enablers of professionalisation; system components that promote professionalism; and community of practice to support professional development and clinical expertise. Conclusion Paramedic practice is evolving. This should be reflected in clinical practice and education, and more paramedic-led research. Paramedic training may need to move from the college to the university environment to reflect equal standing with colleagues in the broader healthcare system. This study shows strong motivation among paramedics and management to enhance professional practice and professionalism. To achieve this, a culture of trust, developing engagement and communication strategies and establishing a community of practice are crucial.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".