ArticleHeart rhythm2025
A novel scoring system and correlative analysis of the strength and effectiveness of nationwide high school cardiopulmonary resuscitation mandates: Insights from a high school CPR study.
Article in Heart rhythm, 2025. 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.
- Improving bystander CPR and AED training among college students: strategies and barriers.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026Article
- Establishing a National Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Program in Indian High schools and colleges: An expert collaborative call to action and implementation model.Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNumerous states have introduced cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training mandates for high school students and staff to prevent sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, the content and implementation of these mandates vary substantially. Furthermore, a comprehensive and objective assessment of these mandates and their impact is lacking.
objectiveWe aimed to conduct a thorough evaluation of CPR training mandates across the United States.
methodsWe developed a novel scoring system based on proposed CPR standards, training and certification requirements, and legislative action to assess current mandates. This was used to rate the CPR mandates across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Mandate scores were then compared with available real-world registry data as a surrogate for efficacy from 2018 to 2021.
resultsState CPR mandate scores ranged from 0 to 47, with a higher score indicating more robust mandates. The median and mean scores were 24 (interquartile range, 19.5-27) and 21.52 ± 8.61, respectively, with 35 being the highest score. Intraobserver variability was 0.986 (95% CI, 0.944-1.028; P < .001). The year of implementation did not influence the strength of the score (R
conclusionModest scoring consistency highlights the need for robust, standardized CPR requirements to potentially mitigate SCD. This study lays the groundwork for evidence-informed policy development in this area.
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.