ArticleResuscitation plus2025
Cognitive limitations in depth estimation for dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a prospective simulation study.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DACPR) protocols often instruct bystanders to perform chest compressions to a target depth of 50-60 mm. However, whether laypersons can accurately perceive and achieve these depth targets remains unclear. This study evaluated laypersons' ability to estimate 50 mm in horizontal length, vertical depth, and chest compression depth. Methods: We conducted a prospective simulation study enrolling adult laypersons without cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training within two years. Participants were asked to draw a 50 mm line, press a vertical measurement plate to an estimated depth of 50 mm, and perform chest compressions to 50 mm. Tasks were repeated after provision of a 50 mm visual reference. Accuracy was assessed by calculating the mean difference from 50 mm and the proportion of estimations within the acceptable range (45-55 mm). Results: 100 participants were enrolled. Horizontal length was significantly underestimated (mean difference -3.5 ± 16.6 mm, Conclusion: Laypersons have significant difficulty estimating 50 mm in length, vertical depth, and applying target chest compression depth. Providing a visual reference did not significantly improve performance.
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.