Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34945015›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021

Community Initiatives to Promote Basic Life Support Implementation-A Scoping Review.

Andrea Scapigliati, Drieda Zace, Tasuku Matsuyama, Luca Pisapia, Michela Saviani, Federico Semeraro, Giuseppe Ristagno, Patrizia Laurenti, Janet E Bray, Robert Greif and 1 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Improving bystander CPR and AED training among college students: strategies and barriers.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. CJC open · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Andrea ScapigliatiInstitute of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7935-7410
Drieda ZaceItalian Resuscitation Council, 40128 Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3623-6800
Tasuku MatsuyamaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4068-0306
Luca PisapiaInstitute of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8832-1903
Michela SavianiInstitute of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Federico SemeraroItalian Resuscitation Council, 40128 Bologna, Italy.
Giuseppe RistagnoItalian Resuscitation Council, 40128 Bologna, Italy.
Patrizia LaurentiSection of Hygiene, University Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8532-0593
Janet E BrayDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3400, Australia.
Robert GreifDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-0160-2073
On Behalf Of The International Liaison Committee On Resuscitation Education Implementation And Teams Task Force

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEarly intervention of bystanders (the first links of the chain of survival) have been shown to improve survival and good neurological outcomes of patients suffering out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many initiatives have been implemented to increase the engagement of communities in early basic life support (BLS) and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), especially of lay people with no duty to respond. A better knowledge of the most effective initiatives might help improve survival and health system organization. Aim of the scoping review: To assess the impact of specific interventions involving lay communities on bystander BLS rates and other consistent clinical outcomes, and to identify relevant knowledge gaps.

methodsThis scoping review was part of the continuous evidence evaluation process of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR), and was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. We performed a literature search using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases until 1 February 2021. The screening process was conducted based on predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, and for each included study, we performed data extraction focusing on the type of intervention implemented, and the impact of these interventions on the specific OHCAs outcomes.

resultsOur search strategy identified 19 eligible studies, originating mainly from the USA (47.4%) and Denmark (21%). The type of intervention included in 57.9% of cases was a community CPR training program, in 36.8% bundled interventions, and in 5.3% mass-media campaigns. The most commonly reported outcome for OHCAs was bystander CPR rate (94.7%), followed by survival to hospital discharge (36.8%), proportion of people trained (31.6%), survival to hospital discharge with good neurological outcome (21%), and Return of Spontaneous Circulation (10.5%). Community training programs and bundled interventions improved bystander CPR in most of the included studies.

conclusionBased on the results of our scoping review, we identified the potential benefit of community initiatives, such as community training in BLS, even as part of bundled intervention, in order to improve bystander CPR rates and patient outcomes.

Indexed as

basic life supportbystander cardiopulmonary resuscitationcardiopulmonary resuscitationcommunity initiativesoutcomeout-of-hospital cardiac arrestscoping review

Identifiers

PMID34945015
PMCPMC8703423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.