Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37959404›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023

Attitudes of Asian and Polish Adolescents towards the Use of Ecological Innovations in CPR Training.

Filip Jaskiewicz, Dariusz Timler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Filip JaskiewiczEmergency Medicine and Disaster Medicine Department, Medical University of Lodz, 90-419 Łódź, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-9309-6432
Dariusz TimlerEmergency Medicine and Disaster Medicine Department, Medical University of Lodz, 90-419 Łódź, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-5415-5660

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe potential use of manikins made of environmentally friendly materials (biodegradable or easily recycled) could be a milestone in promoting cardiac arrest awareness and mass resuscitation training without the threat of generating large amounts of unprocessable waste. The main aim of the study was to compare the attitude of young adults from Asia and Poland towards cardiopulmonary resuscitation training forms and to evaluate the innovative concept of an ecological resuscitation manikin; Methods: This was a survey-based study conducted during two events in Thailand and Poland in 2023; Results: A total of 226 questionnaires were included in the final analysis. Asian respondents were significantly more likely to choose traditional training than Polish participants (78% vs. 58%, respectively). A manikin that is mainly biodegradable was the most common choice across the entire study group. Young Asians were significantly more likely to choose a traditional stationary course, while Polish respondents were highly significantly more likely to opt for hybrid training (online with practical training provided at the student's home).

conclusionsIn the total study group, young people from Poland and parts of Asia are most likely to participate in traditional on-site instructor-led training, but a comparison across groups showed a significant tendency for young Poles to choose a hybrid training option, i.e., a combination of online and hands-on training. Despite some differences, both study groups showed a strong interest in pro-environmental behavior and the use of more ecofriendly solutions than previously used in resuscitation training.

Indexed as

cardiopulmonary resuscitationecologymedical education

Identifiers

PMID37959404
PMCPMC10648462

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.