ArticleResuscitation plus2021
Computer simulation of the effectiveness of novel cardiac arrest response systems.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learning to dispatch volunteers to out-of-hospital cardiac arrests.Health care management science · 2026Article
- Drones delivering automated external defibrillators for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A scoping review.Resuscitation plus · 2025Review
- Review
- [AED drones on the rise? : Use of drones to improve public access defibrillation].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo use a computer simulation model to predict the response time and survival impact of a sample of novel cardiac arrest response systems, such as those that use cellphone apps to dispatch citizen mobile responders and those that use drones to deliver an AED to the cardiac arrest location.
methodsWe developed a model which applies a Monte Carlo approach to simulate the response time and predicted survival for cardiac arrest events within a specific region. We used the model to compare the performance of 4 different novel response systems, along with simulated EMS performance, in Bellevue, Washington. We estimated the 10 year cost for each system, which was utilized together with the system performance predictions in a cost-benefit analysis.
resultsThe best performing systems in the simulation were a mobile responder system capable of providing both CPR and defibrillation, similar to the PulsePoint
conclusionsOur simulation results suggest that these novel response systems have the potential to substantially improve survival at an efficient cost.
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.