Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30252151›Full record

SynthesisScandinavian journal of caring sciences2019

Caring science research in the ambulance services: an integrative systematic review.

Birgitta Wireklint Sundström, Anders Bremer, Veronica Lindström, Veronica Vicente

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scandinavian journal of caring sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Workplace violence from the ambulance personnel's perspective, a qualitative study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Altruism in Paramedicine: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Specialist Ambulance Nurses' Perceptions of Nursing: A Phenomenographic Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Patients' experiences of the caring encounter with the psychiatric emergency response team in the emergency medical service-A qualitative interview study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Birgitta Wireklint SundströmPreHospen - Centre for Prehospital Research, University of Borås, Borås, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8536-1910
Anders BremerPreHospen - Centre for Prehospital Research, University of Borås, Borås, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7865-3480
Veronica LindströmDivision of Nursing, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden.
Veronica VicenteAcademic EMS, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe ambulance services are associated with emergency medicine, traumatology and disaster medicine, which is also reflected in previous research. Caring science research is limited and, since no systematic reviews have yet been produced, its focus is unclear. This makes it difficult for researchers to identify current knowledge gaps and clinicians to implement research findings.

aimThis integrative systematic review aims to describe caring science research content and scope in the ambulance services. DATA SOURCES: Databases included were MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL, Web of Science, ProQDiss, LibrisDiss and The Cochrane Library. The electronic search strategy was carried out between March and April 2015. The review was conducted in line with the standards of the PRISMA statement, registration number: PROSPERO 2016:CRD42016034156. REVIEW

methodsThe review process involved problem identification, literature search, data evaluation, data analysis and reporting. Thematic data analysis was undertaken using a five-stage method. Studies included were evaluated with methodological and/or theoretical rigour on a 3-level scale, and data relevance was evaluated on a 2-level scale.

resultsAfter the screening process, a total of 78 studies were included. The majority of these were conducted in Sweden (n = 42), fourteen in the United States and eleven in the United Kingdom. The number of study participants varied, from a case study with one participant to a survey with 2420 participants, and 28 (36%) of the studies were directly related to patients. The findings were identified under the themes: Caregiving in unpredictable situations; Independent and shared decision-making; Public environment and patient safety; Life-changing situations; and Ethics and values.

conclusionCaring science research with an explicit patient perspective is limited. Areas of particular interest for future research are the impact of unpredictable encounters on openness and sensitivity in the professional-patient relation, with special focus on value conflicts in emergency situations.

Indexed as

EmpathyAmbulancesDelivery of Health CareEmergency Medical ServicesHumansambulancecaring scienceemergency medical servicesholistic approachpatient perspectiveprehospitalreviewsystematic

Identifiers

PMID30252151
PMCPMC7432173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.