ReviewResuscitation plus2023
Comparison of paediatric basic life support guidelines endorsed by member councils of Resuscitation Council of Asia.
Review in Resuscitation plus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Do We Actually Help Choking Children? The Quality of Evidence on the Effectiveness and Safety of First Aid Rescue Manoeuvres: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- ILCOR pediatric life support recommendations translation to constituent council guidelines: An emphasis on similarities and differences.Resuscitation · 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
12 authors at 10 institutions in 9 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Paediatric cardiac arrest outcomes, especially for infants, remain poor. Due to different training, resource differences, and historical reasons, paediatric cardiac arrest algorithms for various Asia countries vary. While there has been a common basic life support algorithm for adults by the Resuscitation Council of Asia (RCA), there is no common RCA algorithm for paediatric life support.We aimed to review published paediatric life support guidelines from different Asian resuscitation councils. Methods: Pubmed and Google Scholar search were performed for published paediatric basic and advanced life support guidelines from January 2015 to June 2023. Paediatric representatives from the Resuscitation Council of Asia were sought and contacted to provide input from September 2022 till June 2023. Results: While most of the components of published paediatric life support algorithms of Asian countries are similar, there are notable variations in terms of age criteria for recommended use of adult basic life support algorithms in the paediatric population less than 18 years old, recommended paediatric chest compression depth targets, ventilation rates post-advanced airway intra-arrest, and first defibrillation dose for shockable rhythms in paediatric cardiac arrest. Conclusion: This was an overview and mapping of published Asian paediatric resuscitation algorithms. It highlights similarities across paediatric life support guidelines in Asian countries. There were some differences in components of paediatric life support which highlight important knowledge gaps in paediatric resuscitation science. The minor differences in the paediatric life support guidelines endorsed by the member councils may provide a framework for prioritising resuscitation research and highlight knowledge gaps in paediatric resuscitation.
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.