ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2017
North American Public Opinion Survey on the Acceptability of Crowdsourcing Basic Life Support for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest With the PulsePoint Mobile Phone App.
Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mobile applications enhance out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Enhancing citizens response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review of mobile-phone systems to alert citizens as first responders.Resuscitation · 2020Pooled it
- Mapping of Crowdsourcing in Health: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Pooled it
- Impact of a 9-1-1-Integrated Mobile App on Bystander CPR: Implementation of PulsePoint in an Urban County.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- An app to keep: smartphone-based dispatch of community first responder to cardiac arrest.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Professional prehospital clinicians' experiences of ethical challenges associated with the collaboration with organised voluntary first responders: a qualitative study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Smartphone-activated volunteer responders and bystander defibrillation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in private homes and public locations.European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care · 2023Article
- Patient perspectives and use of copayment assistance during the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2023Article
- Citizen Responder Activation in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest by Time of Day and Day of Week.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2022Article
- [Ethics of resuscitation and end of life decisions].Notfall & rettungsmedizin · 2021Review
- Development and Validation of a Comprehensive Well-Being Scale for People in the University Environment (Pitt Wellness Scale) Using a Crowdsourcing Approach: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- New Concepts in Sudden Cardiac Arrest to Address an Intractable Epidemic: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe PulsePoint Respond app is a novel system that can be implemented in emergency dispatch centers to crowdsource basic life support (BLS) for patients with cardiac arrest and facilitate bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator use while first responders are en route.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to conduct a North American survey to evaluate the public perception of the above-mentioned strategy, including acceptability and willingness to respond to alerts.
methodsWe designed a Web-based survey administered by IPSOS Reid, an established external polling vendor. Sampling was designed to ensure broad representation using recent census statistics.
resultsA total of 2415 survey responses were analyzed (1106 from Canada and 1309 from the United States). It was found that 98.37% (1088/1106) of Canadians and 96% (1259/1309) of Americans had no objections to PulsePoint being implemented in their community; 84.27% (932/1106) of Canadians and 55.61% (728/1309) of Americans said they would download the app to become a potential responder to cardiac arrest, respectively. Among Canadians, those who said they were likely to download PulsePoint were also more likely to have ever had CPR training (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.4; P=.002); however, this was not true of American respondents (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.79-1.3; P=.88). When asked to imagine themselves as a cardiac arrest victim, 95.39% (1055/1106) of Canadians and 92.44% (1210/1309) of Americans had no objections to receiving crowdsourced help in a public setting; 88.79% (982/1106) of Canadians and 84.87% (1111/1309) of Americans also had no objections to receiving help in a private setting, respectively. The most common concern identified with respect to PulsePoint implementation was a responder's lack of ability, training, or access to proper equipment in a public setting.
conclusionsThe North American public finds the concept of crowdsourcing BLS for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest to be acceptable. It demonstrates willingness to respond to PulsePoint CPR notifications and to accept help from others alerted by the app if they themselves suffered a cardiac arrest.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.