• An independent jury with at least three members with high professional competence in prehospital emergency medicine will be established.
• Geographical and organizational diversity should be sought to ensure an impartial and unbiased jury.
• The jury is led by a jury chair. In the event of dissent during the handling of a formal complaint from a participating team, the jury chair has the casting vote.

• An independent and experience-based group of judges will be established.
• Diversity in the group must be ensured to avoid bias, with as equal representation as possible from relevant stations, health trusts, or regions.
• The judges must have high professional competence within their field.
• Each participating team is assessed by two judges. In cases with multiple patients, the number of judges is increased by one additional judge per patient.

Clear and transparent criteria shall be defined for judging participants’ performances. The criteria shall show how the cases are weighted between medical interventions, operational assessments, teamwork, care, and critical interventions.

• Medical interventions, operational assessments, teamwork, care, and critical interventions account for 95%.
• The judge may give a subjective assessment, which accounts for 5%.
• The criteria are published after the championship.

The assessment criteria are described for each individual case. For each assessment criterion, the team can achieve:

• 0 points: not performed
• 1 point: partially or incompletely performed
• 2 points: performed

The predefined weighting affects the value of achieved points in each individual case. The scoring system must allow assessment of medical and operational skills, teamwork, care for patients, relatives, and others, as well as critical interventions.

A relative score is calculated so that the cases have equal significance in the overall assessment.

• Participants are judged on their ability to manage realistic emergency situations.
• The scenarios may be varied and challenging, and must reflect real working conditions.
• Participants must not be exposed to unnecessary psychological trauma.

The goal is for the competition to be fair, and for all teams to have equal terms and conditions during case completion. Participating teams may complain about the judging or completion of a case scenario during a championship.

Complaints may only concern formal errors for which the team itself is not responsible. Professional assessment of the team’s performance cannot be appealed.

Formal errors may, for example, include incorrect information, late information, too little time during the response, inappropriate disruption of the work at or before a station, or other circumstances that may have given the team poorer conditions than other teams.

A complaint must be made orally at the end of the case, and then in writing, electronically or on paper, to the organizer’s representatives through judges or staff immediately and as soon as possible after the challenged station has ended.

Complaints are handled by an appointed jury consisting of three chief judges. The complaint is processed and decided before results are published. The main jury’s decision is final and cannot be appealed.

If the complaint is upheld, the team may be allowed to complete the case again, or points may be deducted or added.

• The organizer is responsible for ensuring that judges receive the necessary training to understand and apply the assessment criteria.
• The competition shall be conducted with a high ethical standard among judges and participants.
• Emphasis is placed on honesty, openness, accountability, and respect.
• EMS Norway’s ethical guidelines apply to the conduct of ambulance championships.