Impact of the COVID-19 on Bystanderism: Does a Pandemic Change the Canadian Public’s Willingness to Help during Cardiac Arrest Emergency?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Bystander CPR rates have increase from 15% to 30% in many countries over the last 20 years. However, these gains are at risk of being lost in the face of fear of transmission of the SARS-COV-2 virus given the global COVID-19 pandemic. This survey study was designed to examine the opinions and perceptions of the Canadian public on bystanderism as it relates to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic with a view to understanding the implications of those opinions on our expectations of bystanders during, and after the pandemic. Methods: In order to capture a pan-Canadian sample of the general public, we engaged with a well-established public opinion polling vendor, IPSOS (www.ipsos.com), to conduct a robust survey on public willingness to do bystander CPR in the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic. Results: A total of n=1,000 surveys were completed by Canadian adults using the IPSOS eNation Canadian Online Omnibus survey platform.In summary there were five key findings from this pan-Canadian survey: 1) the ability to recognize cardiac arrest remains a point of confusion for the lay public, 2) at the time of the survey only about half of respondents said they would respond to someone having cardiac arrest, 3) the majority of respondents said the pandemic has changed their willingness to respond to someone in cardiac arrest, 4) willingness to use an AED is low and the greatest barrier was reported as lack of experience, and lastly 5) most Canadians say it is important to be certified in CPR and are willing to take a CPR training course, however only half are willing to pay for it. Conclusion: Bystander CPR is an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest victim’s best chance of survival and so our understanding of how we encourage more citizens to respond given the current realities is more crucial than ever. Wider dissemination of the growing evidence on the safety of CPR in the context of COVID-19 and resuscitation training courses implemented with specific CPR maneuvers to reduce the risk of infection should be implemented to continued uncertainty and erosion in bystander CPR culture.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".