ArticleScientific reports2026
Bystander and emergency medical service responses to and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest among domestic and non-domestic visitors in Japan.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Abstract
This study aimed to compare characteristics of emergency medical service (EMS)-transported emergencies and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) among domestic and non-domestic visitors in Japan. Utstein-style OHCA registry data from 2018 to 2023 were merged with relevant transport data to identify patient residency status (domestic or non-domestic visitors). EMS-transported emergencies involving non-domestic visitors were characterised by higher incidences during non-daytime hours, in Tokyo, and at public locations and higher proportions of severe emergency cases. Non-domestic visitor OHCAs were associated with shorter EMS response time intervals, younger age, and lower proportions of witness, presumed cardiac aetiology, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and worse outcomes. Neurologically favourable 1-month outcomes of bystander-witnessed OHCA were significantly worse in non-domestic visitors than in domestic visitors, regardless of witness status and aetiology: 8.2% in non-domestic visitors (312/3817) vs. 14.4% in domestic visitors (2880/20,020) (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval], 0.61 [0.55-0.68]). Bystander-witnessed OHCA outcomes remained worse in non-domestic visitors, even after propensity score matching (9.1% vs. 14.2%, 0.65 [0.54-0.79]; estimated difference [95% confidence interval], 3.7 [2.5-4.9] %). Worse OHCA outcomes in non-domestic visitors were likely due to disturbed bystander responses to OHCA and other potential barriers between bystanders and non-domestic visitors.
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.