ArticleJournal of emergencies, trauma, and shock
Influence of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic and Bystander-victim Relationship on the Willingness of Laypeople and Health-care Providers to Perform Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.
Article in Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shock. 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.
- What limits a bystander's action to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation in China? Insights from a cross-sectional study conducted in Shaanxi Province.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) reduces mortality from out.of.hospital cardiac arrest. The willingness to perform CPR (W-CPR) is also critical. Uncertain effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on W-CPR were reported. Our objectives aim to examine W-CPR during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the influence of the bystander-victim relationship, bystander characteristics, and CPR background on the W-CPR of laypeople and healthcare providers (HCPs). Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted between August 2020 and November 2020 among Thai laypeople and HCPs. A structured questionnaire was given to volunteers as an online survey. We recorded W-Conventional CPR (W-C-CPR), W-Compression.only CPR (W-CO-CPR), chest compression, automated external defibrillator (AED), mouth.to.mouth, face shield, and pocket mask ventilation on family members (FMs), acquaintances, and strangers during the study (pandemic) and in nonpandemic situation and analyzed. Results: We included 419 laypeople and 716 HCPs. During the pandemic, laypeople expressed less willingness in all interventions ( Conclusion: Participants were less W-CPR during the COVID-19 pandemic on all recipients (laypeople: 2.8%-21.0%, HCPs: 7.6%-31.2%), except for laypeople with FMs. The recipient's relationship was more critical in W-C-CPR than in W-CO-CPR, especially in HCPs.
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.