Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 538

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Survival After Application of Automatic External Defibrillators Before Arrival of the Emergency Medical System

Open access
Weisfeldt, Myron L., Sitlani, Colleen M., Ornato, Joseph P., Rea, Thomas, Aufderheide, Tom P., Davis, Daniel, Dreyer, Jonathan, Hess, Erik P., Jui, Jonathan, Maloney, Justin, Sopko, George, Powell, Judy, Nichol, Graham, Morrison, Laurie J.·2010·Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract

Objectives The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of contemporary automatic external defibrillator (AED) use. Background In the PAD (Public Access Defibrillation) trial, survival was doubled by focused training of lay volunteers to use an AED in high-risk public settings. Methods We performed a population-based cohort study of persons with nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest before emergency medical system (EMS) arrival at Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) sites between December 2005 and May 2007. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the independent association between AED application and survival to hospital discharge. Results Of 13,769 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests, 4,403 (32.0%) received bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation but had no AED applied before EMS arrival, and 289 (2.1%) had an AED applied before EMS arrival. The AED was applied by health care workers (32%), lay volunteers (35%), police (26%), or unknown (7%). Overall survival to hospital discharge was 7%. Survival was 9% (382 of 4,403) with bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation but no AED, 24% (69 of 289) with AED application, and 38% (64 of 170) with AED shock delivered. In multivariable analyses adjusting for: 1) age and sex; 2) bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation performed; 3) location of arrest (public or private); 4) EMS response interval; 5) arrest witnessed; 6) initial shockable or not shockable rhythm; and 7) study site, AED application was associated with greater likelihood of survival (odds ratio: 1.75; 95% confidence interval: 1.23 to 2.50; p < 0.002). Extrapolating this greater survival from the ROC EMS population base (21 million) to the population of the U.S. and Canada (330 million), AED application by bystanders seems to save 474 lives/year. Conclusions Application of an AED in communities is associated with nearly a doubling of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. These results reinforce the importance of strategically expanding community-based AED programs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.11.077

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 538

Metadata

Authors
Weisfeldt, M. L., Sitlani, C. M., Ornato, J. P., Rea, T., Aufderheide, T. P., Davis, D., Dreyer, J., Hess, E. P., Jui, J., Maloney, J., Sopko, G., Powell, J., Nichol, G., & Morrison, L. J.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-04
Volume
55
Issue
16
Pages
1713-1720
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1499845087
Cited by
538
References
1
FWCI
37.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Survival After Application of Automatic External Defibrillators Before Arrival of the Emergency Medical System. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.11.077
The paper
Weisfeldt, M. L., Sitlani, C. M., Ornato, J. P., Rea, T., Aufderheide, T. P., Davis, D., Dreyer, J., Hess, E. P., Jui, J., Maloney, J., Sopko, G., Powell, J., Nichol, G., & Morrison, L. J. (2010). Survival After Application of Automatic External Defibrillators Before Arrival of the Emergency Medical System. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.11.077

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.