ArticleBMC emergency medicine2025
Attitudes of emergency healthcare workers on electric vehicle accidents: a descriptive study.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to determine the cognitive, affective, and behavioral attitudes of healthcare professionals involved in the initial intervention, treatment, and reporting of electric vehicle accidents (EVAs) and to compare these attitudes on the basis of their individual characteristics. DESIGN AND
methodsA descriptive cross-sectional design was employed. The sample consisted of 402 healthcare workers in Turkey. Data were collected via a survey that included demographic questions and the Electric Vehicle Accident Attitude Scale, a 27-item instrument developed by Kayhan et al. Attitudes were measured across cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions. Descriptive statistics (frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation) were used alongside t tests and ANOVA, and MANOVA to compare attitudes by personal and professional variables. Cluster analysis was used to group participants according to their EVA-related attitudes.
resultsThe participants demonstrated moderate overall attitudes toward EVAs. While cognitive and affective attitudes were low, behavioral attitudes were relatively high. No significant differences were found profession, marital status, age, or years of experience (p > 0.05); however, attitudes varied significantly by work unit and gender (p < 0.05). Compared with dispatch and emergency department staff, ambulance teams had more favorable behavioral (M = 3.77) and overall (M = 3.15) attitudes.
conclusionsEVAs pose unique risks due to their battery structure and limited control, distinguishing them from conventional vehicle incidents. Knowledge gaps and emotional hesitation among healthcare workers highlight the need for targeted training programs that extend beyond healthcare providers to include other frontline responders, such as firefighters and traffic police. In addition, forensic specialists involved in injury assessment and cause-of-death determination should receive EVA-specific awareness training to enhance their preparedness for such cases. Furthermore, the implementation of structured EVA-specific training programs-shaped by the attitudes identified in this study-may not only improve the quality of emergency care but also serve a preventive function in potential future legal risks related to patient care.
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.