Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
E-pub ahead of print

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

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Jensen, TW, Lockey, A, Perkins, GD, Granholm, A, Eberhard, KE, Hasselager, A, Møller, TP, Ersbøll, AK, Folke, F, Lippert, A, Østergaard, D, Handley, AJ, Chamberlain, D & Lippert, F 2020, 'The Copenhagen Tool A research tool for evaluation of Basic Life Support educational interventions' Resuscitation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.08.120

APA

CBE

Jensen TW, Lockey A, Perkins GD, Granholm A, Eberhard KE, Hasselager A, Møller TP, Ersbøll AK, Folke F, Lippert A, Østergaard D, Handley AJ, Chamberlain D, Lippert F. 2020. The Copenhagen Tool A research tool for evaluation of Basic Life Support educational interventions. Resuscitation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.08.120

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Jensen, Theo Walther ; Lockey, Andrew ; Perkins, Gavin D ; Granholm, Anders ; Eberhard, Kristine E ; Hasselager, Asbjørn ; Møller, Thea Palsgaard ; Ersbøll, Annette Kjær ; Folke, Fredrik ; Lippert, Anne ; Østergaard, Doris ; Handley, Anthony J ; Chamberlain, Douglas ; Lippert, Freddy. / The Copenhagen Tool A research tool for evaluation of Basic Life Support educational interventions. In: Resuscitation. 2020.

Bibtex

@article{e92ce7e7cb854b8fac5f440ff7c72780,
title = "The Copenhagen Tool A research tool for evaluation of Basic Life Support educational interventions",
abstract = "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.",
author = "Jensen, {Theo Walther} and Andrew Lockey and Perkins, {Gavin D} and Anders Granholm and Eberhard, {Kristine E} and Asbj{\o}rn Hasselager and M{\o}ller, {Thea Palsgaard} and Ersb{\o}ll, {Annette Kj{\ae}r} and Fredrik Folke and Anne Lippert and Doris {\O}stergaard and Handley, {Anthony J} and Douglas Chamberlain and Freddy Lippert",
note = "Copyright {\circledC} 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.",
year = "2020",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.08.120",
language = "English",
journal = "Resuscitation",
issn = "0300-9572",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Copenhagen Tool A research tool for evaluation of Basic Life Support educational interventions

AU - Jensen, Theo Walther

AU - Lockey, Andrew

AU - Perkins, Gavin D

AU - Granholm, Anders

AU - Eberhard, Kristine E

AU - Hasselager, Asbjørn

AU - Møller, Thea Palsgaard

AU - Ersbøll, Annette Kjær

AU - Folke, Fredrik

AU - Lippert, Anne

AU - Østergaard, Doris

AU - Handley, Anthony J

AU - Chamberlain, Douglas

AU - Lippert, Freddy

N1 - Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.

PY - 2020/9/1

Y1 - 2020/9/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

U2 - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.08.120

DO - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.08.120

M3 - Journal article

JO - Resuscitation

JF - Resuscitation

SN - 0300-9572

ER -

ID: 60840285