ArticleResuscitation plus2022
Piloting a Basic Life Support instructor course: A short report.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The aim was to describe a new shortened pilot of the European Resuscitation Council's standard Basic Instructor Course. Methods: The four-hour pilot followed a blended learning strategy (pre-course preparation, on-site small-group sessions). Each participant taught a short Basic Life Support competency to the group (micro-teaching) and received the group's feedback. A feedback "drill" session followed. Primary quantitative outcome was the proportion of Basic Instructor Course participants subsequently teaching Basic Life Support. Post-course teachings were recorded and compared to standard eight-hour Basic Instructor Courses. Participants' open feedback question answers were qualitatively analyzed and presented descriptively. Results: This pilot Basic Instructor Course taught 31 healthcare providers in 4 courses in 2019-2021 (aged 31.5 ± 12.9 years; 61 % women; 29 % physicians; 71 % medical students; 21 % no teaching experience). Participants reported that they gained most from micro-teaching (64 %), and advice on their teaching (50 %). Some judged the course as being too long (29 %). Twenty-seven pilot course participants (87 %) (including three instructor candidates) started teaching, whereas only nine of 37 participants of the 3 courses (24 %, including three instructor candidates) from the standard eight-hour course did. Conclusion: Participants of the pilot shortened Basic Instructor Course in a healthcare setting were successfully trained to teach European Resuscitation Council's Basic Life Support provider courses in a short four-hour format. The pilot course seems to enable future instructors to teach Basic Life Support provider courses. Higher motivation to teach resulted in four times as many instructors who taught courses after the pilot course compared to the standard course.
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.