ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2011
Comparison of peer-led versus professional-led training in basic life support for medical students.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03511872 (Peers Versus Professional Training of Basic Life Support in Syria), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
Peers Versus Professional Training of Basic Life Support in Syria: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- From image to clinical judgment: a randomized near-peer teaching trial on systematic chest radiograph interpretation.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Peer video feedback builds basic life support skills: A randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.PloS one · 2021Trial
- Peers versus professional training of basic life support in Syria: a randomized controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2018Trial
- Article
- Exploration of 'generational' peer-led CPR training in the Australian community using blended learning approaches: a pilot randomised controlled trial.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Peer-led learning: a novel approach to promote rural healthcare interest among medical students.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Awareness and attitude about basic life support among medical school students in Jeddah University, 2019: A cross-sectional study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2021Article
- Immediate type hypersensitivity and late phase reaction occurred consecutively in a patient receiving ethambutol and levofloxacin.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2018Article
- The benefits of peer-led teaching in medical education.Advances in medical education and practice · 2016Article
- The Use of Peer-Assisted Learning in Teaching Clinical Skills in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Scoping Review.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effect of peer-led training in basic life support (BLS) in the education of medical students has not been assessed. SUBJECTS AND
methodsThis study was a randomized controlled trial with a blinded outcome assessor. A total of 74 fourth-year medical students at Ehime University School of Medicine, Japan were randomly assigned to BLS training conducted by either a senior medical student (peer-led group) or a health professional (professional-led group). The primary outcome measure was the percentage of chest compressions with adequate depth (38-51 mm) by means of a training mannequin evaluated 20 weeks after BLS training. Secondary outcome measures were compression depth, compression rate, proportion of participants who could ensure adequate compression depth (38-51 mm) and adequate compression rate (90-110/minute), and retention of BLS knowledge as assessed by 22-point questionnaire.
resultsPercentage chest compressions with adequate depth (mean ± SD) was 54.5% ± 31.8% in the peer-led group and 52.4% ± 35.6% in the professional-led group. The 95% confidence interval (CI) of difference of the means was -18.7% to 22.8%. The proportion of participants who could ensure an adequate mean compression rate was 17/23 (73.9%) in the peer-led group but only 8/22 (36.4%) in the professional-led group (P = 0.011). On the 22-point questionnaire administered 20 weeks after training, the peer-led group scored 17.2 ± 2.3 whereas the professional-led group scored 17.8 ± 2.0. The 95% CI of difference of the means was -1.72 to 0.57.
conclusionPeer-led training in BLS by medical students is feasible and as effective as health professional-led training.
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.