Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41408344›Full record

ReviewScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2025

Bystander interventions and their impact on road injury outcomes: a scoping review.

Nicholas Aveyard, George Stephen Russam, Jake Gluyas-Harris, Tim Nutbeam

Abstract readScoping ReviewReview
In one paragraph

Review in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The diamond minutes: rethinking the earliest link of the trauma chain of survival.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

4 authors.

Nicholas AveyardRoyal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3519-7582
George Stephen RussamAnaesthetic Department, Darlington Memorial Hospital, Darlington, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-7008-7061
Jake Gluyas-HarrisEmergency Department, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-6780-6952
Tim NutbeamIMPACT, Centre for Post-Collision Research Innovation and Translation, Exeter, UK. timnutbeam@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0814-9240

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRoad injury remains a leading global cause of death and disability, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where emergency medical services (EMS) are often limited or incur prolonged response times. In many trauma cases, bystanders are the first to respond and may play a critical role in patient outcomes. While the importance of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in cardiac arrest is well-established, the evidence regarding bystander interventions in trauma care, particularly following road injury, is less well defined. This scoping review systematically examined the prevalence, nature, and impact of bystander interventions following trauma, with particular emphasis on road traffic injuries, and identified the factors that influence bystander behaviour.

methodsThis scoping review followed PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A systematic search was conducted across MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Psychology & Behavioural Sciences Collection via the EBSCO Host platform, supplemented by hand searches using Google Scholar and reference screening. Studies were included if they explored pre-hospital trauma interventions by laypersons or professional bystanders (e.g., police, fire personnel) outside formal healthcare systems. Data were extracted using a structured template, and findings were synthesised descriptively using the Road Injury Chain of Survival as an analytical framework.

resultsA total of 33 studies were included, spanning high-income and low-resource settings. Bystanders were frequently present at trauma scenes but intervention rates ranged significantly depending on context. Bystander interventions (aside from contacting EMS) most commonly included scene safety, patient positioning, and transport, while hypothermia prevention was often missed. Evidence from LMICs demonstrated that structured training programmes for lay first responders led to significant reductions in trauma-related mortality. In contrast, evidence from high-income countries (HICs) showed mixed results, particularly in relation to transport outcomes. Key factors influencing bystander behaviour included prior training, legal protections, psychological barriers, and sociocultural norms.

conclusionBystanders have the potential to significantly impact trauma outcomes, particularly in settings where formal EMS systems are limited. Structured training, supportive legislation, and culturally sensitive educational initiatives can enhance bystander engagement and effectiveness. Bystanders should be recognised as integral components of trauma systems, and future research should focus on optimising their contribution across diverse settings.

Indexed as

Accidents, TrafficCardiopulmonary ResuscitationEmergency Medical ServicesOut-of-Hospital Cardiac ArrestWounds and InjuriesHumansBystanderLaypersonPre-hospitalRoad injuryTrauma

Identifiers

PMID41408344
PMCPMC12713298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.