ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2018
Performance comparison in Pediatric Fundamental Critical Care Support among staff from the USA versus those from resource-limited countries.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the performance of participants in the USA compared with international participants taking the Pediatric Fundamental Critical Care Support (PFCCS) course, and the significance of training for resource-limited environments.
methodsPFCCS courses were conducted in the USA, El Salvador, Haiti, Kenya, and Nepal between January 2011 and July 2013. All of the participants took pre- and post-tests. We compared the performance of these tests between international and USA participants. All participants answered a post-course survey to evaluate the didactic lectures and skill stations.
resultsA total of 244 participants took the PFCCS course, comprising 71 from the USA, 68 from Kenya, 37 from Haiti, 48 from Nepal, and 20 from El Salvador. The mean pre-test score of USA participants (50.6%) was significantly higher than that of international participants (44.7%). There was no significant difference in the post-test score between USA and international participants (78.6% versus 81.4%). There was a significant difference between pre- and post-test scores. There was better appreciation of the course content by the USA participants.
conclusionInternational course takers without prior pediatric intensive care training have similar test scores to USA participants suggesting comparable efficacy.
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.