Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

The Copenhagen Tool A research tool for evaluation of Basic Life Support educational interventions

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Prognosis of myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock according to preadmission out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Randomized blinded trial of automated REBOA during CPR in a porcine model of cardiac arrest

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Serum GFAP and UCH-L1 for the prediction of neurological outcome in comatose cardiac arrest patients

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Socioeconomic disparities in prehospital factors and survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Medical dispatchers' perception of the interaction with the caller during emergency calls: a qualitative study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Management of first responder programmes for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Data concerning the Copenhagen tool: A research tool for evaluation of basic life Support educational interventions

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  5. The evolution of a national, advanced airway management simulation-based course for anaesthesia trainees

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

INTRODUCTION: Over the past decades, major changes have been made in basic life support (BLS) guidelines and manikin technology. The aim of this study was to develop a BLS evaluation tool based on international expert consensus and contemporary validation to enable more valid comparison of research on BLS educational interventions.

METHODS: A modern method for collecting validation evidence based on Messick's framework was used. The framework consists of five domains of evidence: content, response process, internal structure, relations with other variables, and consequences. The research tool was developed by collecting content evidence based on international consensus from an expert panel; a modified Delphi process decided items essential for the tool. Agreement was defined as identical ratings by 70% of the experts.

RESULTS: The expert panel established consensus on a three-levelled score depending on expected response level: laypersons, first responders, and health care personnel. Three Delphi rounds with 13 experts resulted in 16 "essential" items for laypersons, 21 for first responders, and 22 for health care personnel. This, together with a checklist for planning and reporting educational interventional studies within BLS, serves as an example to be used for researchers.

CONCLUSIONS: An expert panel agreed on a three-levelled score to assess BLS skills and the included items. Expert panel consensus concluded that the tool serves its purpose and can act to guide improved research comparison on BLS educational interventions.

Original languageEnglish
JournalResuscitation
Volume156
Pages (from-to)125-136
Number of pages12
ISSN0300-9572
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2020

Bibliographical note

Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

    Research areas

  • AED, BLS, CPR, Education, Validity

ID: 60840285