ArticleAnnals of global health2022
Comparative Effectiveness of an In-Person and a Virtual Basic Emergency Care Instructor Course.
Article in Annals of global health, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of trauma-informed training on pediatricians' perceived-competence in treating war-affected children: a pilot study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Resource limited settings have an ongoing need for access to quality emergency care. The World Health Organization - International Committee of the Red Cross Basic Emergency Care (BEC) course is one mechanism to address this need. Training of BEC trainers has been challenging due to barriers including cost, travel logistics, scheduling, and more recently, social distancing regulations related to the coronavirus pandemic. Objective: We seek to determine if an online virtual format is an effective way to train additional trainers while overcoming these barriers. Methods: The BEC Training-of-Trainers (ToT) course was adapted to a virtual format and delivered entirely online. Participants were assessed with a multiple choice pre- and post-test and completed a course feedback form upon completion. Results from the virtual course were then compared to the results from an in-person ToT course. Findings: The in-person course pre- and post-tests were completed by 121 participants with a pre-test mean of 87% (range 60-100%) and a post-test mean of 95% (range: 75-100; p < 0.05). Virtual course pre- and post-tests by 27 participants were analyzed with a pre-test mean of 89% (range 75-100%) and a post-test mean of 96% (range: 79-100; p < 0.05). No difference in test improvements between the courses was detected (z = -0.485; p = 0.627). The course feedback was completed by 93 in-person participants and 28 virtual participants. Feedback survey responses were similar for all questions except for course length, with in-person participant responses trending towards the course being too long. Conclusions: A virtual format BEC ToT course is effective, feasible, and acceptable. When compared to an in-person course, no difference was detected in nearly all metrics for the virtual format. Utilizing this format for future courses can assist in scaling both the BEC ToT and, by extension, the BEC course globally, particularly in regions facing barriers to in-person training.
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.