ArticleResuscitation plus2025
Resuscitation education science meets virtual and augmented reality: Evolution from potential concept to recommendations.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Collocated mixed reality for basic life support training in medical students: a randomised pilot feasibility trial.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Observational
- Virtual reality versus theoretical training in CPR among adolescents: a randomized trial with a one-year longitudinal follow-up.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Acceptance and feasibility of virtual reality for teaching adult basic life support in older populations.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim of the study: This study aims to examine the evolution of recommendations for integrating Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) into adult Basic Life Support (BLS) education over time. Data sources: In December 2024, we conducted a two-phase search. First, we identified and reviewed publications available on the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) webpage, focusing on resuscitation education science, specifically addressing VR and/or AR in adult BLS education. In the second phase, we reviewed the references and citations of the included publication to identify relevant publications from the American Heart Association (AHA), European Resuscitation Council (ERC), and ILCOR. Results: Across both phases, we included 29 AHA, ERC, and ILCOR publications on resuscitation education. These comprised 16 ILCOR CoSTRs, seven AHA/ERC guidelines (four ERC, three AHA), three ILCOR scientific statements, two AHA scientific statements, and one ILCOR review. The first mention of VR appeared in 2003, but the first recommendation was provided in 2020 AHA guidelines, suggesting its use for adult BLS training based on very low-quality evidence. In 2024, the ILCOR CoSTRs issued a weak recommendation supporting AR and a weak recommendation against VR for adult BLS training, both based on very low-quality evidence. Conclusion: While VR/AR is gaining traction in resuscitation training, its effectiveness remains debated. Initially focused on professionals, it now extends to laypersons and schoolchildren. However, strong evidence is lacking. Future research should assess learning outcomes, guideline adherence, and patient impact to support stronger ILCOR recommendations.
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.