Scandinavian Journal of Trauma Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine· 2026Q1
Development and validation of methods to predict ground- and helicopter-based emergency medical service travel times
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
New models predict ground EMS travel times with R2 values up to 0.79 and helicopter flight times with R2 up to 0.46, using historical data and machine learning to aid dispatcher decisions.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Ground EMS travel time prediction models achieved R2 values of 0.79 (to location) and 0.70 (to hospital).
- Helicopter EMS flight time prediction models achieved R2 values of 0.46 (to location) and 0.38 (to hospital).
- Mean average percentage error for all estimation techniques was 18-20%.
- Models integrate open-source routing tools, linear regression, and gradient boosting with historical data.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract Background Helicopter-based Emergency Medical Services (EMS) are a costly and finite resource and should only be deployed when they provide substantial benefits to patients. One such benefit is a more rapid response to incidents and transport to hospital compared to Ground-based EMS. This study evaluates methods for estimating travel times for the purpose of optimizing the selection of helicopter vs. ground EMS. Methods Ground EMS travel times were estimated using an open-source routing tool, the estimates of which were adjusted using linear regression and gradient boosting models based on historical travel times. Helicopter travel times were similarly estimated based on great circle distances adjusted by historical data. Models were evaluated using several measures of predictive accuracy to enable comparison with other studies. Results In validation data collected after finalization of the methods, the best performing prediction models for Ground EMS travel times explained a substantial portion of variation in drive times to location and to hospital (R2 0.79 and 0.70 respectively), and less for helicopter flight times (R2 0.46 and 0.38 respectively). Mean average percentage error was 18-20% for all investigated estimation techniques and time intervals. Conclusion Integrating tools based on the open-source code provided with this study has the potential to improve the ability of dispatchers to estimate relative travel times and assess the potential time benefit of directing the most appropriate resources to a given patient.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Scandinavian Journal of Trauma Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Emergency Medicine
Emergency MedicineMedicine