ArticleResuscitation plus2021
Calculating real-world travel routes instead of straight-line distance in the community response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: Public-Access Defibrillation and System Approaches to Minimize Avoidable Delay.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Travel Time to Treating Facility and Mortality in Men With Prostate Cancer.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Defining the terminology of first responders alerted for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest by medical dispatch centres: An international consensus study on nomenclature.Resuscitation plus · 2025Article
- Advancements in Public First Responder Programs for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: An Updated Literature Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Installation of Public Access Defibrillators for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrests: Identifying Suitable Locations by Using a Geographic Information System.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- Access to automated external defibrillators and first responders: Associations with socioeconomic factors and income inequality at small spatial scales.Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
- Cardiac interventions in Wales: A comparison of benefits between NHS Wales specialties.PloS one · 2024Article
- A roadmap to building first responder networks: Lessons learned and best practices from Belgium and Switzerland.Resuscitation plus · 2023Article
- Analysis of the Intelligent Tourism Route Planning Scheme Based on the Cluster Analysis Algorithm.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUsing straight-line distance to estimate the proximity of public-access Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs) or volunteer first-responders to potential out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) does not reflect real-world travel distance. The difference between estimates may be an important consideration for bystanders and first-responders responding to OHCAs and may potentially impact patient outcome.
objectivesTo explore how calculating real-world travel routes instead of using straight-line distance estimates might impact the community response to OHCA.
methodsWe mapped 4355 OHCA (01/04/2016-31/03/2017) and 2677 AEDs in London (UK), and 1263 OHCA (18/06/2017-17/06/2018) and 4704 AEDs in East Midlands (UK) using ArcGIS mapping software. We determined the distance from OHCAs to the nearest AED using straight-line estimates and real-world travel routes. We mapped locations of potential OHCAs (London: n = 9065, 20/09/2019-22/03/2020; East Midlands: n = 7637, 20/09/2019-17/03/2020) for which volunteer first-responders were alerted by the GoodSAM mobile-phone app, and calculated response distance using straight-line estimates and real-world travel routes. We created Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and calculated the Area Under the Curve (AUC) to determine if travel distance predicted whether or not a responder accepted an alert.
resultsReal-world travel routes to the nearest AED were (median) 219 m longer (623 m vs 406 m) than straight-line estimates in London, and 211 m longer (568 m vs 357 m) in East Midlands. The identity of the nearest AED changed on 26% occasions in both areas when calculating real-world travel routes. GoodSAM responders' real-world travel routes were (median) 222 m longer (601 m vs 379 m) in London, and 291 m longer (814 m vs 523 m) in East Midlands. AUC statistics for both areas demonstrated that neither straight-line nor real-world travel distance predicted whether or not a responder accepted an alert.
conclusionsCalculating real-world travel routes increases the estimated travel distance and time for those responding to OHCAs. Calculating straight-line distance may overestimate the benefit of the community response to OHCA.
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.