Internationally Informed Consensus on Research Priorities in Paramedicine and Emergency Medical Services (EMS)

OBJECTIVES: Prehospital emergency care systems are expanding in scope and complexity, yet research agendas remain disjointed and often nationally focused. An internationally informed set of research priorities is needed to guide strategic investment and evidence generation across emergency medical services (EMS) and paramedicine contexts, while recognizing that local funding environments and needs will continue to shape national research decisions. The objective of this study was to identify and validate internationally informed research priorities for paramedicine and prehospital EMS using a multi-phase, stakeholder-informed consensus and analytic approach. METHODS: An observational, three-phase mixed-methods study was conducted. Phase 1 involved an open-ended Delphi survey of international prehospital stakeholders to generate research priorities. Phase 2 asked participants to rate the importance of each priority using a 10-point scale; exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed to identify underlying factors. Phase 3 used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test the factor structure. Participants included clinicians, educators, researchers, managers, students, and policy stakeholders from multiple countries to maximize breadth of stakeholder input. RESULTS: Across the three phases, responses were obtained from 1,299, 717, and 954 participants, respectively, with 703 complete cases included in the final CFA. The final model comprised nine interrelated factors encompassing 40 research priorities. Factors reflected key areas of contemporary prehospital practice, including operations, clinical governance, evidence-based practice, health and well-being, special care (community paramedicine), culture, education and training, trauma care, and clinical care. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated acceptable model fit, supporting the robustness of the identified structure. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents an internationally informed framework of research priorities for prehospital emergency care. The findings provide a practical foundation for researchers, funders, EMS organizations, and policy stakeholders to align future research efforts, reduce duplication, and address high-impact gaps across diverse prehospital systems, while remaining responsive to local context.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Prehospital Emergency Care
Published
2026-06-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/10903127.2026.2687828
Primary Topic
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Internationally Informed Consensus on Research Priorities in Paramedicine and Emergency Medical Services (EMS)

Enrico Dippenaar, Richard Armour, Julia Williams, Thomas Hofmann et al.
Prehospital Emergency Care
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
article

Internationally Informed Consensus on Research Priorities in Paramedicine and Emergency Medical Services (EMS)

Enrico Dippenaar, Richard Armour, Julia Williams, Thomas Hofmann, Talal Alshammari, Walter Tavares, Abdullah Mohammed Alobaid, Alan M Batt, Eystein Grusd, Georgette Eaton, Justin Hunter, Sarah Abdul Karim, Abdulmajeed Mobrad, William Leggio, Yu‐Tung Chang, Saeed Alqahtani, W Stoy, Siobhán Masterson, Eihab Khasawneh, Brett A. Williams, Alaa Oteir, Alexander Olaussen, Hideharu Tanaka, Niamh M. Cummins, Marcus Qin Wen Ong, Christine King
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Prehospital emergency care systems are expanding in scope and complexity, yet research agendas remain disjointed and often nationally focused. An internationally informed set of research priorities is needed to guide strategic investment and evidence generation across emergency medical services (EMS) and paramedicine contexts, while recognizing that local funding environments and needs will continue to shape national research decisions. The objective of this study was to identify and validate internationally informed research priorities for paramedicine and prehospital EMS using a multi-phase, stakeholder-informed consensus and analytic approach. METHODS: An observational, three-phase mixed-methods study was conducted. Phase 1 involved an open-ended Delphi survey of international prehospital stakeholders to generate research priorities. Phase 2 asked participants to rate the importance of each priority using a 10-point scale; exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed to identify underlying factors. Phase 3 used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test the factor structure. Participants included clinicians, educators, researchers, managers, students, and policy stakeholders from multiple countries to maximize breadth of stakeholder input. RESULTS: Across the three phases, responses were obtained from 1,299, 717, and 954 participants, respectively, with 703 complete cases included in the final CFA. The final model comprised nine interrelated factors encompassing 40 research priorities. Factors reflected key areas of contemporary prehospital practice, including operations, clinical governance, evidence-based practice, health and well-being, special care (community paramedicine), culture, education and training, trauma care, and clinical care. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated acceptable model fit, supporting the robustness of the identified structure. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents an internationally informed framework of research priorities for prehospital emergency care. The findings provide a practical foundation for researchers, funders, EMS organizations, and policy stakeholders to align future research efforts, reduce duplication, and address high-impact gaps across diverse prehospital systems, while remaining responsive to local context.

Prehospital Emergency Care
Management and Science University (MY), Kokushikan University (JP), Jordan University of Science and Technology (JO), University of Pittsburgh (US), OsloMet – Oslo Metropolitan University (NO), University of Toronto (CA), Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway (IE), National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Science (TW), Queen's University (CA), University of Limerick (IE), King Saud Medical City (SA), Oklahoma State University Medical Center (US), Service de Santé des Armées (FR), University of Oxford (GB), Office of the Chief Scientist (IL), Duke-NUS Medical School (SG), Primary Health Care (QA), HSD Hochschule Döpfer (DE), Centro Universitário Católico do Sudoeste do Paraná (BR), Department of Public Health (US), Anglia Ruskin University (GB), Monash University (AU), Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (SA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
DOISourceOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.