Trial reportBioMed research international2019
Three-Month Retention of Basic Life Support with an Automated External Defibrillator Using a Two-Stage versus Four-Stage Teaching Technique.
Trial report in BioMed research international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training strategies in the times of COVID-19: a systematic literature review comparing different training methodologies.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2021Pooled it
- The application effect of the segmented teaching method in training medical students on clinical practice skills.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Review
- Stepwise approach to skills teaching in resuscitation: A systematic review.Resuscitation plus · 2023Review
- Different perceptions of thorax anatomy and hand placement for chest compressions among healthcare professionals and laypersons: Implications for cardiopulmonary resuscitation.Resuscitation plus · 2021Article
- Bystander performance using the 2010 vs 2015 ERC guidelines: A post-hoc analysis of two randomised simulation trials.Resuscitation plus · 2021Article
- Educational theory and its application to advanced life support courses: a narrative review.Resuscitation plus · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionResuscitation training increases bystander's ability to perform basic life support (BLS) with an automated external defibrillator (AED) immediately after training. However, several studies indicate that resuscitation skills decay rapidly.
methodsThis study evaluates retention of BLS/AED skills three months after an initial study comparing acquisition of BLS/AED skills among laypersons immediately after training with a two-stage versus four-stage teaching technique.
resultsThere was no difference in retention of BLS/AED skills (pass rate 10.8% versus 10.9%, respectively, p=1) three months after training. Total average number of skills adequately performed (of 17) was 13.3 versus 13.7 among laypersons trained with a two-stage and a four-stage technique, respectively. No difference was found in quality of chest compressions and rescue breaths between the two groups.
conclusionThree months after training, this study found no difference in retention of BLS/AED skills among laypersons taught using a two-stage compared to a four-stage teaching technique.
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.