ArticleResuscitation plus2022
Simulation-based assessment of trainee's performance in post-cardiac arrest resuscitation.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Simulation to Improve Medical Decision Making and Communication in Internal Medicine Residents.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2026Article
- Smartphone Use in the Management of Neurological Emergencies: A Simulation-Based Study.Neurocritical care · 2024Observational
- Article
- Incorporation of Simulation in Graduate Medical Education: Historical Perspectives, Current Status, and Future Directions.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To assess trainees' performance in managing a patient with post-cardiac arrest complicated by status epilepticus. Methods: In this prospective, observational, single-center simulation-based study, trainees ranging from sub interns to critical care fellows evaluated and managed a post cardiac arrest patient, complicated by status epilepticus. Critical action items were developed by a modified Delphi approach based on American Heart Association guidelines and the Neurocritical Care Society's Emergency Neurological Life Support protocols. The primary outcome measure was the critical action item sum score. We sought validity evidence to support our findings by including attending neurocritical care physicians and comparing performance across four levels of training. Results: Forty-nine participants completed the simulation. The mean sum of critical actions completed by trainees was 10/21 (49%). Eleven (22%) trainees verbalized a differential diagnosis for the arrest. Thirty-two (65%) reviewed the electrocardiogram, recognized it as abnormal, and consulted cardiology. Forty trainees (81%) independently decided to start temperature management, but only 20 (41%) insisted on it when asked to reconsider. There was an effect of level of training on critical action checklist sum scores (novice mean score [standard deviation (SD)] = 4.8(1.8) vs. intermediate mean score (SD) = 10.4(2.1) vs. advanced mean score (D) = 11.6(3.0) vs. expert mean score (SD) = 14.7(2.2)). Conclusions: High-fidelity manikin-based simulation holds promise as an assessment tool in the performance of post-cardiac arrest care.
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.