ArticleResuscitation plus2022
Public attitudes towards bystander CPR and their association with social deprivation: Findings from a cross sectional study in North England.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influencing factors of public willingness to implement cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A mixed-methods systematic review.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2025Review
- Article
- Knowledge and attitudes towards performing resuscitation among seniors - a population-based study.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024Article
- Automated external defibrillator location and socioeconomic deprivation in Great Britain.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2024Observational
- Reframing Our Approach to Disparities in Cardiac Arrest Outcomes: The Importance of Systems and Structures in Patient Outcomes.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR) is undertaken in only 40% of out of hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) in the UK. Lower rates of BCPR and public access defibrillator (PAD) use have been correlated with lower socio-economic status (SES). The aim of this study was to examine knowledge and attitudes towards BCPR and PAD's using a study specific questionnaire, and to understand how these potentially interact with individual characteristics and SES. Methods: Cross-sectional study between July-December 2021 across areas of varying SES in North England. Results: Six hundred and one individuals completed the survey instrument (mean age = 51.9 years, 52.2 % female). Increased age was associated with being less willing to call 999 (p < 0.001) and follow call handler advice (p < 0.001). Female respondents were less comfortable performing BCPR than male respondents (p = 0.006). Individuals from least deprived areas were less likely to report comfort performing CPR, (p = 0.016) and less likely to know what a PAD is for, (p = 0.025). Higher education level was associated with increased ability to recognise OHCA (p = 0.005) and understanding of what a PAD is for (p < 0.001). Individuals with higher income were more likely to state they would follow advice regarding BCPR (p = 0.017) and report comfort using a PAD (p = 0.029). Conclusion: Individual characteristics such as age and ethnicity, rather than SES, are indicators of knowledge, willingness, and perceived competency to perform BCPR. Policy makers should avoid using SES alone to target interventions. Future research should examine how cultural identity and social cohesion intersect with these characteristics to influence willingness to perform BCPR.
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.