ArticleArchives of academic emergency medicine2022
Challenges of Emergency Medical Services Response to Arasbaran Twin Earthquakes; a Content Analysis.
Article in Archives of academic emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Key Contributors to Fatigue in Disaster Responders: Analysis of the 2024 Noto Peninsula Earthquake.Safety and health at work · 2026Article
- Factors affecting disaster preparedness in prehospital emergency dispatch centers: mapping of expert perspectives.International journal of emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Pre-hospital emergency: analyzing the status of medication and equipment in pre-hospital emergency bases.Journal of injury & violence research · 2025Article
- Challenges of pre-hospital emergency care at Addis Ababa Fire and Disaster Risk Management Commission, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Analysis of articles in the Journal of Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine in 2022.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: One of the most important concerns in responding to disasters is providing Basic Life Support (BLS) services. Considering the key role of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) in providing BLS, the purpose of this study is to investigate the experience of provincial EMS during their response to the Arasbaran twin earthquakes and its challenges in Iran. Methods: This study was conducted using a qualitative approach and the conventional content analysis method. Data were collected through Focused Group Discussions (FGD) and semi-structured in-depth interviews with purposively-selected EMS paramedics and officials in East Azerbaijan Province, Iran. To form the main categories, the interviews were encoded in three stages and the similar codes were placed under the same subcategories and merged. Results: A total of 26 EMS paramedics participated in the study. The codes extracted from the interviews, after three stages of reduction, were placed in the top ten categories, including the lack of preparedness and coordination, dead bodies' management challenges, responders' psychosocial support, deficiencies in supplies and ambulances, difficulty of access to rural areas, volunteer management, non-documentation of the experiences, communication challenges, recalling, and deploying of EMS responders. Conclusion: Timely response of the EMS and paramedics' sense of responsibility for providing services were positive and successful points about the emergency response operations. The weaknesses of EMS should, therefore, be addressed through transferring of experiences and by planning and arranging training courses.
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.