ArticleBMC medical education2026
Evaluation of basic life support practice skills based on artificial intelligence technology: system construction and evaluation equivalence validation.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBasic life support (BLS) skills are the core competencies of healthcare professionals in responding to emergency situations. Traditional manual assessments suffer from subjective bias, low efficiency, and are affected by examiner fatigue. Artificial intelligence (AI) technology brings innovative opportunities for skill assessment, but currently there is a lack of mature and validated BLS AI assessment systems.
aimTo construct a basic life support practice skills evaluation system based on artificial intelligence technology, and verify its equivalence to manual evaluation. The purpose is to construct an evaluation system of basic life support practice skills based on artificial intelligence technology, verify its equivalence with manual evaluation, and analyse the advantages and development direction of artificial intelligence technology in the evaluation of basic life support practice skills.
methodsThe BLS practical skills evaluation system based on AI technology was developed based on RTMPose, ST-GCN, SVM, YOLOX and Whisper AI base models, and the BLS practical skills assessment environment was constructed, which contains audio and video capture systems, CPR simulators with distance sensors, and displays for human-computer interaction with candidates. Using a paired design, the BLS practical skills assessment was conducted in August 2024 among 85 new nurses of the class of 2024 at Ruijin Hospital of Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, where each candidate's BLS skills performance was assessed by both the examiner and the AI system. The differences between the examiner scores and the AI system scores were compared, and at the same time, the self-assessment results of the Visual Analogue Scale of Fatigue Severity (VAS-F) of the four examiners before and after the scores were collected, as well as the candidates' satisfaction and acceptance of the application of the system for the BLS practical skills assessment.
resultsThere was no significant difference between AI system scores and examiner scores (t = -0.294, p = 0.769), with good absolute agreement further confirmed by an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.868 (95% CI: 0.803-0.912). Examiner VAS-F self-ratings were 73.50 ± 19.33 before and 82.25 ± 25.10 after the examination, respectively, and 51 (64.56%) of the candidates indicated that the AI system assessment helped to reduce their nervousness.
conclusionAI system marking is consistent with the results of examiner marking and can be used to evaluate BLS practical skills, and, the application of AI system can improve the effectiveness of the assessment organisation. Meanwhile, the candidates' acceptance of the AI system was good, and the application can be expanded after further optimisation of the system. Candidates showed good acceptance of the AI system; however, expansion of application should proceed only after further optimization of system stability to reduce failure rates below 5%.
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.