ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2020
Sign language instrument for assessing the knowledge of deaf people about Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of educational video on deaf people's knowledge and skills for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomized controlled trial.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2023Trial
- Basic life support training for people with disabilities. A scoping review.Resuscitation plus · 2023Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto build and validate the content on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) of a sign language instrument for assessing the knowledge of the deaf.
methodmethodological study in which the content validity process was used by 22 specialists in cardiac arrest and 16 deaf people. In the validation of internal consistency, 113 deaf people participated. For the assessment of the deaf, the Assistive Technology Assessment Questionnaire was used and, in the content validity, an instrument with a Likert scale was used, which included the content, clarity, objectivity, organization and language. Items with a minimum agreement of 80% were considered valid, according to the Content Validity Index (CVI) and binomial test. The internal consistency was verified by Cronbach's alpha.
resultsThe instrument contains 11 questions about the identification of cardiorespiratory arrest, activation by aid and high quality chest compression. It had a minimum content validity of 81% by the specialists, 90% by the deaf participants and internal consistency by the Cronbach alpha of 0.86, being considered high.
conclusionthe instrument can be used in research to survey the previous knowledge of deaf people about CPR, as well as in pre and/or post-testing studies that test educational interventions with this public.
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.