ArticleResuscitation plus2025
Developing lifesaving skills in children: a simulation-based randomized controlled trial in schools.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Basic Life Support education for schoolchildren is crucial to increase bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation rates. This study assessed schoolchildren's cardiopulmonary resuscitation knowledge and skill retention six months after a single Basic Life Support training session delivered by medical students. Methods: This was a simulation-based randomized controlled trial conducted in 2024 with students aged 11-16 from 6 schools in Caxias do Sul, Brazil. Intervention Group received a single theoretical-practical Basic Life Support training by medical students with a QCPR manikin. Control Group received no intervention. After six months, both groups underwent practical evaluation through a simulated cardiac-arrest scenario with manikin and completed a knowledge questionnaire. The primary outcome, chest compression quality (0-100), was measured using Laerdal Resusci Anne QCPR manikin software, assessing depth, rate, recoil. Secondary outcomes included Basic Life Support knowledge scores (multiple-choice questionnaire) and percentage of students performing the three resuscitation steps on the manikin (recognition, activating emergency, initiating compressions). Evaluators were blinded to group allocation. Results: 198 students completed the study (Intervention: 105; Control: 93). Six months post-training, Intervention Group significantly outperformed Control Group in completing the resuscitation sequence and achieved higher knowledge scores. Chest compression quality was higher in the Intervention Group (mean compression quality score: 51.71 vs. 17.81; p < 0.001). Conclusions: A single-session Basic Life Support training delivered by medical students improves and sustains theoretical and practical skills in schoolchildren for at least six months. These findings provide evidence for implementing brief Basic Life Support programs in schools as a public health strategy.
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.