ArticleCureus2022
Impact of COVID-19 on Basic Life Support Training Among Medical Students: An Experimental Study.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Development of a Sound Recognition-Based Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Training System.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AIMS AND
objectivesSudden cardiac death (SCD) is the most common cause of mortality worldwide. Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) improves the victim's outcome, especially when the response time for advanced life support is prolonged. We performed a study to estimate the difference in knowledge among first-year medical students after basic life support (BLS) training (part of their foundation course) before and during the novel COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe recruited first-year medical college students (batch of 2019-20: pre-COVID group - P and batch of 2020-21: COVID-19 era group - C) who were undergoing BLS training for the first time and consented to this study. Since the training was delayed and affected by COVID-19 for the batch of 2020-21, their training duration was shorter with more usage of audiovisual aids. The difference in the change in knowledge (by a questionnaire with 10 questions of one mark each) after training by the two methods was analysed. Analysis of variance, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Mann-Whitney U test, and chi-square tests was used as applicable to compare the groups, and p-value <0.05 was considered significant. The results are analysed by IBM SPSS version 20.0 software (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA).
resultsThe median (inter-quartile range) marks in group P (89 students) in the pre-test was 3 (4-2) and in the post-test was 6 (7-5) (out of 10). The corresponding marks in group C (112 students) in the pre-test were 3 (4-2) and in post-test was 7 (8-6). The knowledge improvement in group C was more with all the three changes being significant (p=0.0001). In group C, females had more improvement than males (p=0.0001).
conclusionWe found a significant increase in the improvement of the knowledge after the BLS training in group C compared to group P. In group C, the improvement was better in females (59% increase in mean marks versus 22% in males).
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.