TY - JOUR
T1 - Mapping and appraising evidence syntheses of resuscitation training for healthcare professionals
T2 - Protocol for a systematic review of reviews
AU - LIFESAVER (Leading Innovations for Emergency Support and Vital Enhancements in Resuscitation) Study Network
AU - Efendi, Defi
AU - Edison Sunarya, Chiyar
AU - Ihsan, Mawardi
AU - Adelia, Hazrina
AU - Rochana, Nana
AU - Ekawati, Heni
AU - Amaliya, Sholihatul
AU - Wong, Cho Lee
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright: © 2026 Efendi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2026
Y1 - 2026
N2 - BACKGROUND: The number of systematic reviews on resuscitation training has grown rapidly, offering valuable evidence to guide healthcare decision-making. However, methodological shortcomings can compromise validity and yield biased or misleading conclusions. This systematic review aims to systematically map the distribution of published systematic reviews on resuscitation training interventions, evaluate their methodological quality, investigate contextual and methodological factors associated with systematic review quality, and delineate priorities for future systematic reviews. METHODS: This systematic review protocol follows the PRISMA-P guidelines. A comprehensive search from the inception to August 2025 will be conducted across eight major databases, comprising CENTRAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, ProQuest, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ERIC, to identify published reviews on resuscitation training interventions for healthcare professionals and students, excluding laypersons. All reviews that are appropriate for the inclusion criteria will be screened and selected independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Data extraction will cover study characteristics and methodological features, and quality appraisal will be performed using the AMSTAR 2 tool. Findings will be synthesized narratively following the SWiM framework, focusing on methodological rigor and evidence gaps. CONCLUSION: This study will systematically evaluate the methodological quality of published systematic reviews on resuscitation training using the AMSTAR 2 tool, providing key insights to promote higher standards in systematic review conduct and reporting within healthcare education.
AB - BACKGROUND: The number of systematic reviews on resuscitation training has grown rapidly, offering valuable evidence to guide healthcare decision-making. However, methodological shortcomings can compromise validity and yield biased or misleading conclusions. This systematic review aims to systematically map the distribution of published systematic reviews on resuscitation training interventions, evaluate their methodological quality, investigate contextual and methodological factors associated with systematic review quality, and delineate priorities for future systematic reviews. METHODS: This systematic review protocol follows the PRISMA-P guidelines. A comprehensive search from the inception to August 2025 will be conducted across eight major databases, comprising CENTRAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, ProQuest, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ERIC, to identify published reviews on resuscitation training interventions for healthcare professionals and students, excluding laypersons. All reviews that are appropriate for the inclusion criteria will be screened and selected independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Data extraction will cover study characteristics and methodological features, and quality appraisal will be performed using the AMSTAR 2 tool. Findings will be synthesized narratively following the SWiM framework, focusing on methodological rigor and evidence gaps. CONCLUSION: This study will systematically evaluate the methodological quality of published systematic reviews on resuscitation training using the AMSTAR 2 tool, providing key insights to promote higher standards in systematic review conduct and reporting within healthcare education.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105045445492
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0349693
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0349693
M3 - Article
C2 - 42441546
AN - SCOPUS:105045445492
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 21
SP - e0349693
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
IS - 7
ER -