ArticleResuscitation plus2026
Chest compression metrics during infant basic life support using 15:2 and 10:2 compression-ventilation ratios: a randomized crossover simulation study.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: High-quality chest compressions and effective ventilation are key components of pediatric basic life support (BLS), although the optimal compression-ventilation ratio remains uncertain. This study compared cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performance metrics using two compression-to-ventilation (C:V) ratios in a simulated infant BLS model. Methods: We conducted a randomized crossover simulation study (July 2022-June 2023) in a university-affiliated quaternary hospital. Pediatric healthcare professionals received standardized BLS training and performed paired 4-min infant CPR scenarios on a manikin without an advanced airway, using either a 15:2 or 10:2 C:V ratio, with role switching at 2 min. After a washout period, the alternate ratio was tested. The primary outcome was the proportion of chest compressions with guideline-compliant depth; secondary outcomes included additional compression and ventilation metrics. Results: Ninety-two professionals participated (mean age 41.2 years; 93.5% female). The proportion of compressions with guideline-compliant depth was similar between groups (15:2: 82.0 ± 2.0% vs. 10:2: 83.5 ± 2.0%; Conclusion: In this simulation, chest compression depth did not differ between 15:2 and 10:2 CPR, while the 10:2 ratio was associated with a lower chest compression fraction.
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.