ArticleCureus2025
Assessment of Electrocardiogram (ECG) Interpretation Proficiency Among Paramedics in a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 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
Background Electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation is a critical clinical skill essential for the rapid diagnosis of potentially life-threatening cardiac conditions, such as arrhythmias and myocardial infarctions. Accurate interpretation plays a pivotal role in clinical decision-making, particularly in emergency settings. Paramedics often acquire practical ECG experience during clinical rotations under the guidance of experienced clinicians. Familiarity with standardized guidelines, such as those from the American Heart Association, is fundamental for ensuring accurate and consistent ECG assessments. Aim This study aimed to evaluate the proficiency in ECG interpretation among paramedics at various training and professional levels in a tertiary care teaching hospital, with the goal of improving recognition and resuscitation outcomes in in-hospital cardiac arrests. Materials and methods A cross-sectional observational study was conducted using a validated, self-administered online questionnaire distributed via Google Forms. A total of 90 participants, including BSc Emergency Medical Technology (EMT) and BSc Intensive Care Technology (ICT) students, interns, emergency medical technician (EMT) staff, and emergency room (ER) nursing staff at Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences (AIMS), were surveyed. The questionnaire comprised 15 structured questions assessing ECG interpretation skills. Participants were categorized based on their scores: 0-5 (poor knowledge), 6-10 (average knowledge), and 11-15 (good knowledge). Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS 20.0, with Kruskal-Wallis and Spearman's correlations applied. Results Among the 90 participants, 66 (73.3%) demonstrated good knowledge, while 24 (26.7%) showed average knowledge; no participant fell into the poor category. The mean total score was 11.86±2.33. Third-year students (mean: 13.21±1.87), interns (12.26±1.59), and staff (12.32±1.92) outperformed second-year students (9.57±2.34). The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed significant differences in the scores across training levels (χ²=26.024,
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.