ReviewResuscitation plus2025
Association between bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation initiation and patient's sex: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Resuscitation plus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adaptation of the CONOCES-BLS scale to citizens: evidence of content validity and preliminary psychometric evaluation.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Representation of female and male pictorial instructions on automated external defibrillators, pad packages, and defibrillation pads.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Targeted solutions to bridge the gap between sexes in the use of automated external defibrillators.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Underuse of bystander defibrillation on females during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a retrospective observational study in Aotearoa New Zealand.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Knowledge and Willingness to Perform Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation by Bystanders in Jordan; A Nationwide Cross-sectional Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2026Article
- CPR manikin diversity for BLS education: Current status mapped by an international cross-sectional survey and steps to reach health equity.Resuscitation plus · 2025Article
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
Background and aim: The chain of survival, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillation (AED), improves patients' outcomes in case of cardiac arrest. Socioeconomic status, race, and gender appear to be associated with the likelihood of receiving resuscitation. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the association between female sex and the odds of bystander CPR initiation and AED application in patients with cardiac arrest, compared with male individuals. Methods: The protocol of this systematic review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024512024). PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane were searched for studies describing the association between patient sex and the initiation of bystander CPR or the application of AED pads. Results: Fifteen observational cohort studies were included, for a total of 499,854 patients. The analysis from adjusted estimates of the primary outcome showed substantial heterogeneity ( Conclusions: The evidence regarding the association between bystander CPR initiation and patient's sex is characterised by substantial heterogeneity. Female sex appears to be associated with a lower probability of AED pad application compared with males.
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.