Observational studyScientific reports2025
Influence of professional background on assessment of simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation videos in an observational study.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Video-assisted dispatcher support in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (VA-CPR) has shown beneficial effects on CPR quality. This study examines the influence of professional background on the ability to identify typical errors in CPR performance using video-based assessments. Within this simulation-based observational study, 61 participants (31 EMS personnel, 30 emergency physicians) evaluated nine video sequences showing simulated CPR or ventilation. Participants were grouped by profession, not randomly. The primary endpoint was the correct identification of expert-defined errors in the presented videos, analyzed in relation to professional background. Evaluation accuracy for CPR and ventilation videos was examined in relation to participant characteristics. Overall, n = 427 CPR videos were correctly classified in 73.3% of cases by EMS personnel and 75.7% by emergency physicians (β = 0.370, SE = 0.297, 95% CI: -0.21 to 0.95, p = 0.213). Ventilation scenarios (n = 122) were correctly classified in 93.5% (EMS) and 98.3%, (EP) (β = 4.50, SE = 6.73, 95% CI: -8.82 to 17.82, p = 0.505). The models assessing classification accuracy for CPR and ventilation did not reach statistical significance (p
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.