ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Comparative evaluation of a basic life support educational model in non-health university students: the "
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a global public health problem with high rates of preventable mortality. Teaching basic life support to the general population is a key strategy for improving survival, although its implementation is often restricted to the healthcare setting. This study evaluates the potential benefits and social impact of an innovative model of basic life support teaching and learning applied to university professors in non-health-related degrees, within the Methods: A cross-sectional study was designed between two groups of students: one consisting of healthcare professionals and the other of non-health-related university professors previously trained in basic life support. Theoretical knowledge and practical skills were analyzed using structured objective tests, assessing the correct execution of essential maneuvers, such as recognition of cardiac arrest, activation of the emergency system, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and use of the automated external defibrillator. Descriptive and inferential analyses were performed, considering Results: Both groups showed a high level of acquisition of practical basic life support skills, with consistent results in most basic maneuvers. The only significant differences were observed in automated external defibrillator management (OR = 3.19; Discussion: Basic life support training for non-healthcare university teachers appears to be a valid and useful approach for disseminating resuscitation knowledge and enhancing society's capacity to respond to life-threatening emergencies. This model can be integrated into cross-disciplinary university training programmemes, strengthening the culture of resuscitation and contributing to a sustainable health and social impact.
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.