Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40530184›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2025

Optimized pediatric emergency nursing and Its effects on successful resuscitation and adverse reactions in children.

Xia Zhang, Xiao Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2025. 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

2 authors.

Xia ZhangXiangyang Central Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Hubei University of Arts and Science, Xiangyang City, Hubei Province, China.
Xiao ChenXiangyang Central Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Hubei University of Arts and Science, Xiangyang City, Hubei Province, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate impacts of optimized pediatric emergency care on successful resuscitation and adverse events of children in the emergency department. Methods: Pediatric patients who visited our hospital's emergency room between January 2022 and December 2023 were chosen as the study participants. These patients were randomly divided into the study group (using optimized emergency care model) and the control group (using conventional emergency care model). The two groups were compared for the rate of successful resuscitation, stabilization time of vital signs, average length of hospital stay, incidence of adverse reactions, parental satisfaction with nursing care, scores of Self-Assessment Scale of Anxiety (SAS) and Self-Assessment Scale of Depression (SDS) before and after nursing care, and assessment of life quality. Results: A total of 140 children were included in this study. Seventy patients each were assigned to study and control groups. After the intervention, the study group's successful resuscitation rate was considerably greater than the control's ( Conclusion: The study demonstrates that the optimized pediatric emergency care intervention is an effective approach for improving the successful resuscitation of children in emergency medicine, and mitigate the incidence of adverse reactions. Concurrently, the optimized nursing intervention was found beneficial for anxiety and depression levels, with a notable improvement in their quality of life as well as parental satisfaction. Optimized nursing interventions therefore are valuable and are recommended for wider pediatric emergency care practice.

Indexed as

adverse effectsnursing interventionspediatric emergency caresatisfactionstable vital signssuccessful resuscitation

Identifiers

PMID40530184
PMCPMC12170575

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.