Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39713854›Full record

Trial reportPrehospital and disaster medicine2024

Training Children for Prehospital Aquatic Interventions: Assessing Throwing Skills Using Traditional and Alternative Materials in a Simulated Water Rescue.

Lucía Peixoto-Pino, Roberto Barcala-Furelos, Miguel Lorenzo-Martínez, Adrián Gómez-Silva, Javier Rico-Díaz, Antonio Rodríguez-Núñez

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Prehospital and disaster medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Lucía Peixoto-PinoFaculty of Education Sciences, University of Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain.
Roberto Barcala-FurelosREMOSS Research Group, Faculty of Education and Sports Sciences, University of Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain.
Miguel Lorenzo-MartínezREMOSS Research Group, Faculty of Education and Sports Sciences, University of Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5545-8890
Adrián Gómez-SilvaREMOSS Research Group, Faculty of Education and Sports Sciences, University of Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain.
Javier Rico-DíazFaculty of Education Sciences, University of Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain.
Antonio Rodríguez-NúñezCLINURSID Research Group, Psychiatry, Radiology, Public Health, Nursing and Medicine Department; University of Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDrowning remains a significant cause of mortality among children world-wide, making prevention strategies crucial. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends training children in safe rescue techniques, including the use of basic skills such as throwing floating objects. This study aims to address a knowledge gap regarding the throwing capabilities of children aged six to twelve using conventional and alternative water rescue materials.

methodA total of 374 children aged six to twelve years participated in the study, including both males and females. A randomized crossover approach was used to compare throws with conventional rescue material (ring buoy and rescue tube) to an alternative material (polyethylene terephthalate [PET]-bottle). Throwing distance and accuracy were assessed based on age, sex, and the type of rescue tools used.

resultsChildren of all ages were able to throw the PET-bottle significantly farther than both the ring buoy (P <.001; d = 1.19) and the rescue tube (P <.001; d = 0.60). There were no significant differences (P = .414) in the percentage of children who managed to throw each object accurately.

conclusionConventional rescue materials, particularly the ring buoy, may not be well-suited for long-distance throws by children. In contrast, lighter and smaller alternatives, such as PET-bottles, prove to be more adaptable to children's characteristics, enabling them to achieve greater throwing distances. The emphasis on cost-effective and easily accessible alternatives should be implemented in drowning prevention programs or life-saving courses delivered to children.

Indexed as

DrowningRescue WorkChildCross-Over StudiesFemaleHumansMaleManikinsPolyethylene TerephthalatesPolyethylene Terephthalatesdo-it-yourselfdrowninglife-savingPET bottlerescue tubering buoysafe rescue

Identifiers

PMID39713854
PMCPMC11802203

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.