Trial reportEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2024
Rapid cycle deliberate practice versus postsimulation debriefing in pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation training: a randomized controlled study.
Trial report in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 2025 Korean Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Part 10. Education and system implementation for enhanced chain of survival.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2026Guideline
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSimulation plays an important role in cardiopulmonary resuscitation training. Comparing postsimulation debriefing with rapid cycle deliberate practice could help determine the best simulation strategy for pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation training among pediatric residents.
methodsThis is a single-blind, prospective, randomized controlled study. First- and second year pediatric residents were enrolled and randomized into two groups (1:1 ratio): rapid cycle deliberate practice group (intervention) or postsimulation debriefing group (control). They participated in two rounds of simulated pediatric cardiopulmonary arrest to assess the simulated pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance gain (round 1) and retention after a 5-6 week washout period (round 2). Scenarios were video-recorded and analyzed by blinded evaluators. The main outcome was the time to initiation of chest compressions. Secondary outcomes included time to recognize a cardiopulmonary arrest, time to recognize a shockable rhythm, time to defibrillation, time to initiation of chest compressions after defibrillation, and chest compression fraction.
resultsSixteen groups participated in the first round and fifteen groups in the second one. Time to intiation of chest compressions decreased from preintervention scenario to the round 1 testing scenario and increased from round 1 to round 2 testing scenario. However, no interaction effects nor group effects were observed (p=0.885 and p=0.329, respectively). There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding the secondary outcomes.
conclusionDespite an overall improvement in simulated pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance, we did not observe significant differences between the two groups regarding the analyzed variables. The decline in simulated pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance after 5 weeks suggests the need for shorter time intervals between training sessions.
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.