ArticleBMJ open2021
Relevance of assessment items in community paramedicine home visit programmes: results of a modified Delphi study.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The development of community paramedicine; a restricted review.Health & social care in the community · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveGuidelines for a structured assessment in community paramedicine home visit programmes have not been established and evidence to inform their creation is lacking. We sought to investigate the relevance of assessment items to the practice of community paramedics according to a pre-established clarity-utility matrix.
designWe designed a modified-Delphi study consisting of predetermined thresholds for achieving consensus, number of rounds of for scoring items, a defined meeting and discussion process, and a sample of participants that was purposefully representative. SETTING AND
participantsWe established a panel of 26 community paramedics representing 20 municipal paramedic services in Ontario, Canada. The sample represented a majority of paramedic services within the province that were operating a community paramedicine home visit programme. MEASURES: Drawing from a bank of standardised assessment items grouped according to domains aligned with the International Classification on Functioning, Disability, and Health taxonomy, 64 previously pilot-tested assessment items were scored according to their clarity (being free from ambiguity and easy to understand) and utility (being valued in care planning or case management activities). Assessment items covered a broad range of health, social and environmental domains. To conclude scoring rounds, assessment items that did not achieve consensus for relevance to assessment practices were discussed among participants with opportunities to modify assessment items for subsequent rounds of scoring.
resultsResulting from the first round of scoring, 54 assessment items were identified as being relevant to assessment practices and 3 assessment items were removed from subsequent rounds. The remaining 7 assessment items were modified, with some parts removed from the final items that achieved consensus in the final rounds of scoring.
conclusionA broadly representative panel of community paramedics identified consensus for 61 assessment items that could be included in a structured, multidomain, assessment instrument for guiding practice in community paramedicine home visit programmes. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN58273216.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.