Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36981694›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Exploring First Responders' Use and Perceptions on Continuous Health and Environmental Monitoring.

Jacob Grothe, Sarah Tucker, Anthony Blake, Chandran Achutan, Sharon Medcalf, Troy Suwondo, Ann Fruhling, Aaron Yoder

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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 · 2024
    Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jacob GrotheCollege of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198, USA.
Sarah TuckerCollege of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198, USA.
Anthony BlakeCollege of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198, USA.
Chandran AchutanCollege of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198, USA.
Sharon MedcalfCollege of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1230-7996
Troy SuwondoCollege of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198, USA.
Ann FruhlingCollege of Information Science & Technology, University of Nebraska-Omaha, Omaha, NE 68182, USA.
Aaron YoderCollege of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4195-7469
University of Nebraska Medical Center · USUniversity of Nebraska at Omaha · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Emergency RespondersWearable Electronic DevicesEnvironmental MonitoringHeart RateHumansMonitoring, PhysiologicVital Signsattitudebehaviorfirst respondersphysiologicalsafetysensor monitoringsurvey

Identifiers

PMID36981694
PMCPMC10048923
OpenAlexW4323664885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read1
measurements read68
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.