Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36065522›Full record

ReviewHealth & social care in the community2022

The development of community paramedicine; a restricted review.

Brendan Shannon, Georgette Eaton, Chelsea Lanos, Matthew Leyenaar, Mike Nolan, Kelly-Ann Bowles, Brett Williams, Peter O'Meara, Gary Wingrove, J D Heffern and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health & social care in the community, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Paramedics: A Missing Workforce in Australia's Mental Health System.The Australian journal of rural health · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Community paramedicine in dementia care.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors.

Brendan ShannonDepartment of Paramedicine, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1957-2311
Georgette EatonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9421-2845
Chelsea LanosCounty of Renfrew Paramedic Service, Pembroke, Canada.
Matthew LeyenaarDepartment of Health and Wellness, Emergency Health Services, Government of Prince Edward Island, Prince Edward Island, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1151-9479
Mike NolanCounty of Renfrew Paramedic Service, Pembroke, Canada.
Kelly-Ann BowlesDepartment of Paramedicine, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5965-5971
Brett WilliamsDepartment of Paramedicine, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6307-1779
Peter O'MearaDepartment of Paramedicine, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8657-5646
Gary WingroveInternational Roundtable on Community Paramedicine, Duluth, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5241-3507
J D HeffernIndigenous Services Canada, Government of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Alan BattDepartment of Paramedicine, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6473-5397

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Community paramedic roles are expanding internationally, and no review of the literature could be found to guide services in the formation of community paramedicine programmes. For this reason, the aim of this restricted review was to explore and better understand the successes and learnings of community paramedic programmes across five domains being; education requirements, models of delivery, clinical governance and supervision, scope of roles and outcomes. This restricted review was conducted by searching four databases (CENTRAL, ERIC, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Google Scholar) as well as grey literature search from 2001 until 28/12/2021. After screening, 98 articles were included in the narrative synthesis. Most studies were from the USA (n = 37), followed by Canada (n = 29). Most studies reported on outcomes of community paramedicine programmes (n = 50), followed by models of delivery (n = 28). The findings of this review demonstrate a lack of research and understanding in the areas of education and scope of the role for community paramedics. The findings highlight a need to develop common approaches to education and scope of role while maintaining flexibility in addressing community needs. There was an observable lack of standardisation in the implementation of governance and supervision models, which may prevent community paramedicine from realising its full potential. The outcome measures reported show that there is evidence to support the implementation of community paramedicine into healthcare system design. Community paramedicine programmes result in a net reduction in acute healthcare utilisation, appear to be economically viable and result in positive patient outcomes with high patient satisfaction with care. There is a developing pool of evidence to many aspects of community paramedicine programmes. However, at this time, gaps in the literature prevent a definitive recommendation on the impact of community paramedicine programmes on healthcare system functionality.

Indexed as

Emergency Medical ServicesAllied Health PersonnelCanadaHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareParamedicinePatient Acceptance of Health Carecommunitycommunity inemobile integrated healthparamedicparamedic practitionerrestricted review

Identifiers

PMID36065522
PMCPMC10087318

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.