ArticleBMC emergency medicine2022
Perceived human factors from the perspective of paramedics - a qualitative interview study.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- The induction process of new professionals in the Swedish ambulance service - a document analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Perceptions of older people regarding drone-delivered defibrillators for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a qualitative study.British paramedic journal · 2025Article
- The role of human factors in paramedics' clinical judgement - A modified Delphi study.PloS one · 2025Article
- The Impact of Emotional Intelligence on Nurses' Professional Quality of Life in Pre-Hospital Emergency Settings: A Multicentre Mixed-Method Study.Journal of clinical nursing · 2025Article
- Ambulance professionals' experiences of teamwork in the context of a team training programme - a qualitative study.BMC emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Psychosocial working conditions, perceived patient safety and their association in emergency medical services workers in Germany - a cross-sectional study.BMC emergency medicine · 2024Article
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
backgroundThe work environment in prehospital emergency medical care setting is dynamic and complex and includes many stressors. However, little is known about the perceived human factors from the perspective of paramedics. In this study, we investigated, from the perspective of paramedics, what are the human factors, and how are they linked to prehospital emergency medical care?
methodsData were collected through semi-structured interviews (n = 15) with Finnish paramedics. The material was analyzed using inductive content analysis.
resultsThree main categories of human factors were identified. The first main category consisted of factors related to work which were divided into two generic categories: "Challenging organizational work environment" and "Changing external work environment." The second main category comprised factors related to paramedics themselves and were divided into three generic categories: "Issues linked to personality," "Personal experiences", and "Factors resulting from personal features." The third main category described that paramedics have difficulties in understanding and describing human factors.
conclusionThis study revealed numerous factors that can affect paramedics' work in the EMS setting. Increased knowledge about human factors in the EMS setting provides organizations with the opportunity to develop procedures that can support paramedics' cognitive and physical work. Human factors in different situations can be addressed to improve occupational and patient safety.
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.