ArticleResuscitation plus2023
Factors affecting public access defibrillator placement decisions in the United Kingdom: A survey study.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2023. 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.
- RescQ™: Study protocol for a feasibility pilot of structured support for bystanders/lay-rescuers following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Optimizing automated external defibrillator incremental deployment to improve out-of-hospital cardiac arrest coverage: a spatial optimization study.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Strategic PAD positioning: a scoping review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- The impact of locked cabinets for automated external defibrillators (AEDs) on cardiac arrest and AED outcomes: A scoping review.Resuscitation plus · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to understand current community PAD placement strategies and identify factors which influence PAD placement decision-making in the United Kingdom (UK). Methods: Individuals, groups and organisations involved in PAD placement in the UK were invited to participate in an online survey collecting demographic information, facilitators and barriers to community PAD placement and information used to decide where a PAD is installed in their experiences. Survey responses were analysed through descriptive statistical analysis and thematic analysis. Results: There were 106 included responses. Distance from another PAD (66%) and availability of a power source (63%) were most frequently used when respondents are deciding where best to install a PAD and historical occurrence of cardiac arrest (29%) was used the least. Three main themes were identified influencing PAD placement: (i) the relationship between the community and PADs emphasising community engagement to create buy-in; (ii) practical barriers and facilitators to PAD placement including securing consent, powering the cabinet, accessibility, security, funding, and guardianship; and (iii) 'risk assessment' methods to estimate the need for PADs including areas of high footfall, population density and type, areas experiencing health inequalities, areas with delayed ambulance response and current PAD provision. Conclusion: Decision-makers want to install PADs in locations that maximise impact and benefit to the community, but this can be constrained by numerous social and infrastructural factors. The best location to install a PAD depends on local context; work is required to determine how to overcome barriers to optimal community PAD placement.
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.