ArticleAnnals of medicine2025
Elucidating cognitive processes in cardiac arrest team leaders: a virtual reality-based cued-recall study of experts and novices.
Article in Annals of medicine, 2025. 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.
- The effectiveness and perceived value of feedback used in cardiac arrest simulation education: a mixed-method systematic review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTeam leadership during medical emergencies like cardiac arrest resuscitation is cognitively demanding, especially for trainees. These cognitive processes remain poorly characterized due to measurement challenges. Using virtual reality simulation, this study aimed to elucidate and compare communication and cognitive processes-such as decision-making, cognitive load, perceived pitfalls, and strategies-between expert and novice code team leaders to inform strategies for accelerating proficiency development.
methodsA simulation-based mixed methods approach was utilized within a single large academic medical center, involving twelve standardized virtual reality cardiac arrest simulations. These 10- to 15-minutes simulation sessions were performed by seven experts and five novices. Following the simulations, a cognitive task analysis was conducted using a cued-recall protocol to identify the challenges, decision-making processes, and cognitive load experienced across the seven stages of each simulation.
resultsThe analysis revealed 250 unique cognitive processes. In terms of reasoning patterns, experts used inductive reasoning, while novices tended to use deductive reasoning, considering treatments before assessments. Experts also demonstrated earlier consideration of potential reversible causes of cardiac arrest. Regarding team communication, experts reported more critical communications, with no shared subthemes between groups. Experts identified more teamwork pitfalls, and suggested more strategies compared to novices. For cognitive load, experts reported lower median cognitive load (53) compared to novices (80) across all stages, with the exception of the initial presentation phase.
conclusionsThe identified patterns of expert performance - superior teamwork skills, inductive clinical reasoning, and distributed cognitive strategiesn - can inform training programs aimed at accelerating expertise development.
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.