ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
Exploring First Responders' Use and Perceptions on Continuous Health and Environmental Monitoring.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of a smartphone app to improve mental health among emergency service workers: A randomised controlled trial.PloS one · 2026Trial
- The Effects of Self-Monitoring Using a Smartwatch and Smartphone App on Stress Awareness, Self-Efficacy, and Well-Being-Related Outcomes in Police Officers: Longitudinal Mixed Design Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Article
- Wearable devices for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A population survey on the willingness to adhere.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2024Article
- Exploring wearable technology use and importance of health monitoring in the hazardous occupations of first responders and professional drivers.Journal of occupational health · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
First responders lose their lives in the line of duty each year, and many of these deaths result from strenuous physical exertion and exposure to harmful environmental agents. Continuous health monitoring may detect diseases and alert the first responder when vital signs are reaching critical levels. However, continuous monitoring must be acceptable to first responders. The purpose of this study was to discover first responders' current use of wearable technology, their perceptions of what health and environmental indicators should be monitored, and who should be permitted to monitor them. The survey was sent to 645 first responders employed by 24 local fire department stations. A total of 115 (17.8%) first responders answered the survey and 112 were used for analysis. Results found first responders perceived a need for health and environmental monitoring. The health and environmental indicators that respondents perceived as most important for monitoring in the field were heart rate (98.2%) and carbon monoxide (100%), respectively. Overall, using and wearing monitoring devices was not age-dependent and health and environmental concerns were important for first responders at any stage of their career. However, current wearable technology does not seem to be a viable solution for first responders due to device expense and durability issues.
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.