ArticleBritish paramedic journal2024
Is the Calgary-Cambridge Model of consultation a suitable communication tool for students and newly qualified paramedics? A qualitative study.
Article in British paramedic journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The Calgary-Cambridge Model (C-CM), developed by Kurtz and Silverman in 1996, is a communication tool developed for doctors. Since its publication, it has been adopted by various healthcare professionals; however, no previous research has been identified that evaluates its use in paramedic practice. This study aims to explore the experience of students and newly qualified paramedics (NQPs) applying the C-CM in practice, and establish their experiences and perceptions of its suitability as a communication tool in the pre-hospital environment. Methods: This MSc research project, conducted in April-May 2021, applied qualitative methods with thematic analysis to written reflections and semi-structured interview transcripts discussing the implementation of C-CM in paramedic practice. A convenience-quota sample of 11 participants, consisting of third-year paramedic students and recent NQPs, were recruited. This research is reported using Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) reporting guidelines. Results: Eleven participants were recruited in total; nine consented to reflective writing analysis and interviews, two consented to writing analysis only. Analysis of the writing samples allowed for a deductive approach to the interview plan. Participants consisted of seven males and four females. All eleven participants (ten British and one Indian) spoke English as a first language. Ages ranged from 18 to 59 years. Career status was 46.2% third-year students and 53.8% NQPs. Four major themes were identified: barriers to implementation of the C-CM in practice; impact of C-CM on paramedic practice; C-CM as a teaching and learning tool in paramedic practice; and adaptation of C-CM for paramedic practice. Conclusions: Participants suggested that implementation of C-CM leads to improved structure and shared decision-making; however, adaptions to make it more paramedic-focused would be welcomed. The diversity of patients and their preferences can make its implementation challenging, and the negative feedback received from experienced ambulance staff was a significant concern to participants.
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.