The rural CPR outreach project: Medical students teach bystander CPR to secondary school students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Prompt bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can double the chance of cardiac arrest survival. Rural and remote communities experience longer emergency service wait times and have lower rates of bystander-CPR compared to their urban counterparts. Our study addresses this disparity. METHODS: We designed a 1.5-h free hands-only CPR course tailored to secondary school students in rural and remote communities taught by medical students. We evaluated our course using pre-test and post-test surveys. RESULTS: We taught over 300 secondary students in 5 days. Less than one-third of students had previously taken a CPR course. We found that brief CPR instruction taught by medical students was effective in both improving students' knowledge of CPR (t[528] = -26, P < 0.01) and perceived comfort in performing CPR (t[548] = -12, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: CPR courses taught by medical students are effective, low cost, and may help address regional health care disparities. Teaching CPR to rural/remote communities may have secondary benefits such as promoting health care careers to rural youth. We encourage other health professional programmes to consider engaging students in CPR outreach projects. INTRODUCTION: Une réanimation cardio-pulmonaire rapide peut doubler les chances de survie en cas d'arrêt cardiaque. Les communautés rurales et éloignées connaissent des temps d'attente plus longs dans les services d'urgence et ont des taux plus faibles de RCP par rapport à leurs homologues urbains. Notre étude porte sur cette disparité. MTHODES: Nous avons conçu un cours de RCP pratique et gratuit d'une heure et demie, adapté aux élèves du secondaire des communautés rurales et isolées et dispensé par des étudiants en médecine. Nous avons évalué notre cours à l'aide d'enquêtes pré-test et post-test. RSULTATS: En 5 jours, nous avons enseigné à plus de 300 élèves du secondaire. Moins d'un tiers des élèves avaient déjà suivi un cours de RCP. Nous avons constaté qu'une brève formation à la RCP dispensée par des étudiants en médecine était efficace pour améliorer les connaissances des élèves en matière de RCP (t[528] = -26, P < 0,01) et la perception de leur aisance à pratiquer la RCP (t[548] = -12, P < 0,01). CONCLUSION: Les cours de RCP dispensés par les étudiants en médecine sont efficaces, peu coûteux et peuvent contribuer à lutter contre les disparités régionales en matière de soins de santé. L'enseignement de la RCP aux communautés rurales/éloignées peut avoir des avantages secondaires tels que la promotion des carrières dans le domaine de la santé auprès des jeunes ruraux. Nous encourageons d'autres programmes professionnels de santé à envisager d'engager leurs étudiants dans des projets de sensibilisation à la RCP.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".