Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42199518›Full record

ArticleResuscitation plus2026

Effect of in situ coaching on cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality: a multicenter randomized simulation study.

Océane Barbe, Lorine Hervieu, Estelle Lefrançois, Cécile Sénémeaud, Florian Michel, Richard Macrez, Guillaume Debaty, Christian Creveuil, Romain Clanet

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Resuscitation plus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Océane BarbeEmergency Department, Normandie Univ, UNICAEN, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Caen Normandie, Avenue de la Côte de Nacre, 14000 Caen, France.
Lorine HervieuEmergency Department, Normandie Univ, UNICAEN, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Caen Normandie, Avenue de la Côte de Nacre, 14000 Caen, France.
Estelle LefrançoisEmergency Department, Hospital of Lisieux, 4 rue Roger Aini, 14100 Lisieux, France.
Cécile SénémeaudLaboratory of Psychology Caen Normandie (LPCN, UR 7452) - Research Center for the Humanities (USR 3486, CNRS-UNICAEN), Normandy University, Unicaen, France.
Florian MichelEmergency Department, Hospital of Argentan, 47 rue Aristide Briand, 61200 Argentan, France.
Richard MacrezEmergency Department, Normandie Univ, UNICAEN, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Caen Normandie, Avenue de la Côte de Nacre, 14000 Caen, France.
Guillaume DebatyUniv. Grenoble Alpes, Emergency Department and Mobile Intensive Care Unit, CNRS, UMR 5525, Grenoble INP, TIMC, 38000 Grenoble, France.
Christian CreveuilBiostatistics and Clinical Research Unit, Normandie Univ, UNICAEN, CHU de Caen Normandie, 14000 Caen, France.
Romain ClanetEmergency Department, Normandie Univ, UNICAEN, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Caen Normandie, Avenue de la Côte de Nacre, 14000 Caen, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A previous manikin-based simulation study among healthcare professionals developed a cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) coaching method that significantly improved CPR quality compared with real-time audiovisual feedback provided by a defibrillator monitor. This study aimed to determine whether these findings could be replicated in a larger, multicenter trial involving first responders. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, block-randomized trial among French firefighters. Participants were randomized into three groups ( Results: A total of 108 participants were enrolled across two centers; one participant withdrew. In the second external chest compression sequence, the CPR coaching group achieved significantly higher CPR quality than the defibrillator monitor group (median 99% [interquartile range (IQR) 99-100] vs 99% [78-99]; Conclusion: The study confirmed the findings of our previous study with healthcare professionals, demonstrating the superiority of CPR coaching over defibrillator monitor feedback for improving CPR quality in a simulation-based setting with lay rescuers.

Indexed as

CoachingElectronic monitorExternal chest compressionIn situLay rescuerOut-of-hospitalSimulation

Identifiers

PMID42199518
PMCPMC13199809

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.