ReviewResuscitation plus2025
Optimization of dispatcher instruction for public-access automated external defibrillator retrieval and use: A scoping review.
Review in Resuscitation plus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dispatcher-assisted AED use in single-rescuer cardiac arrest: study protocol for a randomized simulation study comparing standard and optimized dispatcher-assisted CPR instructions.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Automated External Defibrillator Pad Application Before EMS Arrival in Pediatric Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Functional Access to Public Defibrillators and Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Outcomes: A Population-Based Geospatial Analysis in Korea.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes and Perceived Preparedness Regarding Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Automated External Defibrillator Use Among Health-Related University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Public-access defibrillation is a key step in the chain of survival. Emergency Medical Services dispatchers can help the public locate and use public-access Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs), but there is little information about effectiveness of dispatcher instructions for AED use. This scoping review investigates evidence about the effect of dispatch instruction for public-access AED retrieval and use on process and patient outcomes. Methods: The research team searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane libraries, performed bibliography searches and reviewed 'related articles' identified by PubMed and Google Scholar. We reported patient outcomes including survival to hospital discharge, and process outcomes including rates of and time to AED retrieval and use, and competent AED use. Results: We identified 21 articles: eight clinical observational studies and 13 simulation studies. The only study reporting on clinical outcomes reported that AED application following dispatcher assistance was associated with statistically significant increases in survival to hospital discharge (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.56-5.82) and survival with favourable neurological outcome (AOR 5.46, 95% CI 1.95-15.3), but shock delivery itself was not. Clinical studies reported that dispatch instruction facilitated AED retrieval and use. In simulations, dispatch instruction resulted in an overall shorter time to first shock but, if measuring only the time interval after the AED had arrived, dispatch instructions introduced delay to first shock. Dispatch instruction also resulted in competent AED use more frequently. There were conflicting results about the benefits of video dispatch instructions. Discussion: There is little high-quality evidence about the effect of dispatcher instruction for AED retrieval and use on patient outcomes.
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.