2018
DOI: 10.1080/10903127.2017.1384875
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Does Implementation of Biomathematical Models Mitigate Fatigue and Fatigue-related Risks in Emergency Medical Services Operations? A Systematic Review

Abstract: This systematic review identified no studies that investigated the impact of biomathematical models in EMS operations. Findings from one study of non-EMS shift workers were favorable toward use of biomathematical models as a fatigue mitigation scheduling aid, albeit with very low quality of evidence pertaining to EMS operations. We propose three focus areas of research priorities that, if addressed, could help better elucidate the utility and impact of biomathematical models as a fatigue-mitigation tool in the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
21
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
1
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The median, minimum, and maximum inter-rater agreement (Kappa) between screeners for our seven systematic reviews were 0.66, 0.49, and 0.88, respectively (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20). The percentage of agreement between the screeners and Principal Investigator was strongly correlated and ranged from 90% to 100% (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20). The median, minimum, and maximum number of records retained for the seven systematic reviews was 13, 1, and 100, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…The median, minimum, and maximum inter-rater agreement (Kappa) between screeners for our seven systematic reviews were 0.66, 0.49, and 0.88, respectively (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20). The percentage of agreement between the screeners and Principal Investigator was strongly correlated and ranged from 90% to 100% (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20). The median, minimum, and maximum number of records retained for the seven systematic reviews was 13, 1, and 100, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…We describe the methods and procedures common to seven systematic reviews (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20). We describe the process of decision-making associated with fundamental steps where bias may impact results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations