Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40269878›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2025

Exploring alternative paramedic roles: a multinational mixed-methods survey.

Fintan Feerick, Eoin Coughlan, Shane Knox, Adrian Murphy, Ivan Grady, Conor Deasy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Fintan FeerickNational Ambulance Service College, Dublin / School of Medicine, University College Cork, Dublin/Cork, Republic of Ireland. fintanfeerick@gmail.com.
Eoin CoughlanSchool of Medicine, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Shane KnoxNational Ambulance Service College, Dublin / School of Medicine, University College Cork, Dublin/Cork, Republic of Ireland.
Adrian MurphyNational Ambulance Service College, Dublin / School of Medicine, University College Cork, Dublin/Cork, Republic of Ireland.
Ivan GradyNational Ambulance Service College, Dublin / School of Medicine, University College Cork, Dublin/Cork, Republic of Ireland.
Conor DeasyNational Ambulance Service College, Dublin / School of Medicine, University College Cork, Dublin/Cork, Republic of Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile paramedicine is an evolving profession globally, there remain many disparities around titles and roles within the various jurisdictions that may not be fully captured in the literature.

aimThe aim of this study is to gain a multi-national perspective on the current and future roles within paramedicine, highlighting the challenges and opportunities that shape the profession's ongoing evolution.

methodsA mixed-methods approach was adopted for this survey, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative data. A survey link was distributed internationally to paramedicine professionals via email, journals, and social media. Quantitative data were analysed using Microsoft Excel's statistical functions, with results presented as frequencies, percentages, and numerical summaries. Qualitative data were analysed using narrative synthesis and integrated with quantitative findings to provide a comprehensive overview.

resultsThe study gathered responses from 158 participants representing 59 organisations across 16 countries. Ireland had the highest number of respondents (n = 56) followed by Australia (n = 41) and England (n = 21). Participants outlined current paramedic roles (n = 54) and future roles planned within their respective organisations (n = 39). Participants described aspirational, non-traditional roles that they felt paramedics may adopt into the future (n = 86). Respondents practitioner titles varied across a range of clinical, managerial, and academic specialties, with examples provided (n = 33). Respondents provided various descriptions of the clinical levels of practitioners available within their organisations (n = 41).Various ambulance care models were identified with various combinations (n = 24). Paramedic medical oversight was predominantly provided by a physician (n = 56) although (n = 22) other examples were described. Regulation of paramedic practice provided descriptions of various regulatory bodies (n = 8) with examples of paramedic models of regulation described (n = 9). Respondents described various patient safety framework models implemented within their respective organisations (n = 10).

conclusionThe findings from this study highlight that paramedicine is rapidly evolving in response to varying local healthcare needs and sector-specific challenges. Rather than striving for a uniform standard of practice, the results suggest that paramedicine should be viewed as a flexible and adaptive domain, capable of specialising across diverse clinical, managerial, and academic settings. The diverse titles, roles, and models described by participants reflect the growing complexity of the profession. Furthermore, the study indicates that paramedic practice is often shaped by local contexts, such as organisational needs and healthcare gaps, which create innovative opportunities for expanding the scope of the profession. By embracing this variability and focusing on the development of versatile healthcare practitioners who can adapt to societal needs, paramedicine can continue to evolve effectively within well-governed healthcare systems.

Indexed as

Allied Health PersonnelEmergency Medical ServicesProfessional RoleHumansInternationalityParamedicsSurveys and QuestionnairesMixed methodsMulti-nationalParamedicParamedicineSurvey

Identifiers

PMID40269878
PMCPMC12020164

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.