ReviewInternational journal of emergency medicine2026
Barriers and facilitators while implementing community first responder systems in a western setting: mixed-methods expert consensus.
Review in International journal of emergency medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Closing Editorial: From Emergency Care to Prevention and Innovation.Epidemiologia (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
45 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly cardiopulmonary resuscitation and timely defibrillation are key determinants of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival. Community first responder (CFR) networks improve early response, yet adoption varies internationally. This study summarizes current key factors affecting CFR-system implementation through an international expert consensus process.
methodsA mixed-methods design explored barriers and facilitators to CFR system development. Data were collected during an expert consensus workshop in April 2024 Hinterzarten, Germany (46 experts, 14 countries) and an online survey. Experts were invited based on previous authorship regarding CFR systems. Thematic content analysis and descriptive statistics identified recurrent themes and areas of agreement.
resultsExperts agreed on core needs for effective CFR systems with high consensus regarding locally adapted dispatch algorithms, clear privacy rules for CFR activation, sufficient CFR training, structured debriefing and psychological support. Congruence was weaker regarding funding, legal or governance frameworks, reflecting variation in responsibilities, liability, and automated external defibrillator- (AED-) registry organisation. Findings were structured around a previously developed roadmap outlining four stages of CFR-system maturation. In the exploration phase, unrecognition of delays in Basic Life Support initiation impedes translation of practice gaps into action. Installation is challenged by recruitment, funding, and coordination among stakeholders. Implementation requires outcome evaluation. Moreover, sustainability is threatened by volunteer attrition and reliance on government budgets. Supportive legal frameworks, centralised AED registries, and integration into national health initiatives facilitate both establishment and long-term stability.
conclusionThis exploratory expert consensus process on CFR system implementation highlights the need for stable funding, coherent governance, aligned legal frameworks, comprehensive and exhaustive AED registration, data-driven feedback from practice to system optimisation and targeted training of CFR.
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.