ArticleHealth science reports2023
Emergency medical services preparedness in mass casualty incidents: A qualitative study.
Article in Health science reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Designing a model of emergency medical services preparedness in response to mass casualty incidents: a mixed-method study.BMC emergency medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Identifying the Challenges of Prehospital Emergency Centers in Providing Care in Wartime and Proposing Strategic Solutions: A Qualitative Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Public awareness about the emergency conditions and services provided by emergency medical services in the Northern Border Region of Saudi Arabia.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Comparative descriptive analysis of hospital disaster preparedness using WHO safety index: a multi-center study from Eastern India.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Emergency medical services preparedness in mass casualty incidents: A qualitative study.Health science reports · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: The effective response of emergency medical services in mass casualty incidents (MCIs) calls for sufficient preparation. The components of preparation must be determined first to achieve this goal. This study aimed to describe the elements of preparedness of emergency medical services for MCIs. Methods: A qualitative study was carried out on emergency medical service systems in Iran (from April 2022 to mid-March 2023), using in-depth semistructured interviews with participants who were managers and members of the incident command team, experts, technicians, paramedics, and telecommunicators of emergency medical services. Interviews were carried out face-to-face and via telephone. The data were collected using voice recorder and transcript and analyzed by content analysis method. This study was conducted using the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research. Results: Thirty-six participants were included in the study. A total of 834 codes were analyzed. Thirteen components were extracted from the study and classified as five categories including "Strengthening management and organization," "individual and group empowerment," "capacity expansion," "technology and infrastructure development," and "operational response measures." Conclusion: Emergency medical service preparedness in response to MCIs is a critical issue. For improving preparedness, the main components must be identified. The study results described the elements of emergency medical service preparedness, which could be used as a framework for developing the national model of emergency medical service preparedness in MCIs.
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.