ArticleTurkish journal of emergency medicine
Effectiveness of extended reality-based cardiopulmonary resuscitation training for healthcare students: A systematic review.
Article in Turkish journal of emergency medicine. 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
backgroundCardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a lifesaving intervention where timely, effective actions improve survival. However, traditional Basic and Advanced Life Support (BLS and ALS) training often lacks realism, limiting preparedness among healthcare students. Extended Reality (XR) technologies, including Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality, offer promising tools to enhance CPR training. The aim is to assess the effects of XR on CPR training outcomes among healthcare students. METHODOLOGY: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines, PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies. Two reviewers independently extracted data, with disagreements resolved by a third. Risk of bias was evaluated using Cochrane ROB 2 and ROBINS-I. Due to heterogeneity, findings were synthesized narratively.
resultsEight studies from six countries were included. Evidence showed mixed outcomes: XR improved confidence and reduced anxiety in Basic Life Support and ALS training, but results on technical performance, including CPR knowledge and quality, were inconsistent. Variability in study design and concerns about bias limited generalizability.
conclusionXR shows potential as a valuable complement to traditional CPR training, particularly in blended learning approaches aligned with modern pedagogy. However, inconsistent findings highlight the need for standardized assessments, evaluation of long-term outcomes, and integration of haptic torso simulators to improve technical skills and clarify XR's role in resuscitation education.
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.