Trial reportScientific reports2023
A randomized controlled simulation trial comparing video-assisted with telephone-assisted and unassisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation performed by non-healthcare university students.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Part 4: Systems of Care: 2025 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.Circulation · 2025Guideline
- Comparison of video-assisted CPR using the LINE application and telephone-assisted CPR: a randomized controlled simulation trial.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Trial
- Feasibility of video-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation when the lay responder is alone with the victim: a randomized controlled crossover pilot study.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Comparing Visual Self-Assessment and Virtual Reality Training for Improving Basic Life Support Competency in Nursing Students: An Educational Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Establishing AI-driven evaluation standards and human-in-the-loop guidance for digital first aid education: a perspective.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our randomized controlled simulation study aimed to compare the CPR quality, time-related factors, attitude and self-assessment of non-healthcare university students (aged 18-25) compared video-assisted (V-CPR, n = 50) with telephone-assisted (T-CPR, n = 49) and unassisted (U-CPR, n = 48) CPR in a simulation setting. Regarding to chest compression depth, no difference was found between the three groups (p = 0.065): 41.8 mm, SD = 9.9 in the V-CPR; 35.9 mm, SD = 11.6 in the T-CPR; and 39.4 mm, SD = 15.6 in the U-CPR group. The mean chest compression rate was the best in the V-CPR group (100.9 min
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.