Trial reportBMC emergency medicine2026
Usefulness of chest compression landmarks for improving the quality of infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a simulation study.
Trial report in BMC emergency 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to determine whether using a visible landmark could improve the quality of infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).
methodsIn this matched, randomized, simulation-based study conducted at a tertiary academic hospital, PALS-certified nurses who provided informed consent performed three cycles of infant chest compressions on a Laerdal Little Baby manikin equipped with a QCPR sensor. Each participant completed compressions under one of three randomized conditions: correct landmark, incorrect landmark, and no landmark. The primary outcome was compression accuracy, and the secondary outcome was hand position consistency across cycles.
resultsTwenty-seven PALS-certified nurses were enrolled and evenly randomized into the three groups. Mean compression accuracy was significantly higher in the correct-landmark group compared with the incorrect- and no-landmark groups (99.6% vs. 46.9% and 68.1%, respectively; p < 0.001). Compression depth and rate did not differ among groups, with all within the PALS-recommended range. Cycle-to-cycle spatial variability across cycles was also greatest in the correct-landmark group, demonstrating enhanced precision and reproducibility of infant chest compressions.
conclusionIn this simulation-based study, placing a visible landmark at the correct anatomical site significantly improved the accuracy and consistency of infant chest compressions. Further studies in clinical settings are warranted to validate these findings.
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.