Large Language Model-based Chatbot as a Source of Advice on First Aid in Heart Attack.

The ability of the cutting-edge large language model-powered chatbots to generate human-like answers to user questions hypothetically could be utilized for providing real-time advice on first aid for witnesses of cardiovascular emergencies. This study aimed to evaluate quality of the chatbot responses to inquiries on help in heart attack. The study simulated interrogation of the new Bing chatbot (Microsoft Corporation, USA) with the "heart attack what to do" prompt coming from 3 countries, the Gambia, India and the USA. The chatbot responses (20 per country) were evaluated for congruence with the International First Aid, Resuscitation, and Education Guidelines 2020 using a checklist. For all user inquiries, the chatbot provided answers containing some guidance on first aid. However, the responses commonly left out some potentially life-saving instructions, for instance to encourage the person to stop physical activity, to take antianginal medication, or to start cardiopulmonary resuscitation for unresponsive abnormally breathing person. Mean percentage of the responses having full congruence with the checklist criteria varied from 7.3 for India to 16.8 for the USA. A quarter of responses for the Gambia and the USA, and 45.0% for India contained superfluous guidelines-inconsistent directives. The chatbot advice on help in heart attack has omissions, inaccuracies and misleading instructions, and therefore the chatbot cannot be recommended as a credible source of information on first aid. Active research and organizational efforts are needed to mitigate the risk of uncontrolled misinformation and establish measures for guaranteeing trustworthiness of the chatbot-mediated counseling.

Large Language Model (LLM)-Powered Chatbots Fail to Generate Guideline-Consistent Content on Resuscitation and May Provide Potentially Harmful Advice.

INTRODUCTION: Innovative large language model (LLM)-powered chatbots, which are extremely popular nowadays, represent potential sources of information on resuscitation for the general public. For instance, the chatbot-generated advice could be used for purposes of community resuscitation education or for just-in-time informational support of untrained lay rescuers in a real-life emergency. STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study focused on assessing performance of two prominent LLM-based chatbots, particularly in terms of quality of the chatbot-generated advice on how to give help to a non-breathing victim. METHODS: In May 2023, the new Bing (Microsoft Corporation, USA) and Bard (Google LLC, USA) chatbots were inquired (n = 20 each): "What to do if someone is not breathing?" Content of the chatbots' responses was evaluated for compliance with the 2021 Resuscitation Council United Kingdom guidelines using a pre-developed checklist. RESULTS: Both chatbots provided context-dependent textual responses to the query. However, coverage of the guideline-consistent instructions on help to a non-breathing victim within the responses was poor: mean percentage of the responses completely satisfying the checklist criteria was 9.5% for Bing and 11.4% for Bard (P >.05). Essential elements of the bystander action, including early start and uninterrupted performance of chest compressions with adequate depth, rate, and chest recoil, as well as request for and use of an automated external defibrillator (AED), were missing as a rule. Moreover, 55.0% of Bard's responses contained plausible sounding, but nonsensical guidance, called artificial hallucinations, that create risk for inadequate care and harm to a victim. CONCLUSION: The LLM-powered chatbots' advice on help to a non-breathing victim omits essential details of resuscitation technique and occasionally contains deceptive, potentially harmful directives. Further research and regulatory measures are required to mitigate risks related to the chatbot-generated misinformation of public on resuscitation.

An expert consensus­based checklist for quality appraisal of educational resources on adult basic life support: a Delphi study

Objective: Given the lack of a unified tool for appraising the quality of educational resources for lay-rescuer delivery of adult basic life support (BLS), this study aimed to develop an appropriate evaluation checklist based on a consensus of international experts. Methods: In a two-round Delphi study, participating experts completed questionnaires to rate each item of a predeveloped 72-item checklist indicating agreement that an item should be utilized to evaluate the conformance of an adult BLS educational resource with resuscitation guidelines. Consensus on item inclusion was defined as a rating of ≥7 points from ≥75% of experts. Experts were encouraged to add anonymous suggestions for modifying or adding new items. Results: Of the 46 participants, 42 (91.3%) completed the first round (representatives of 25 countries with a median of 16 years of professional experience in resuscitation) and 40 (87.0%) completed the second round. Thirteen of 72 baseline items were excluded, 55 were included unchanged, four were included after modification, and four new items were added. The final checklist comprises 63 items under the subsections "safety" (one item), "recognition" (nine items), "call for help" (four items), "chest compressions" (12 items), "rescue breathing" (12 items), "defibrillation" (nine items), "continuation of CPR" (two items), "choking" (10 items) and "miscellaneous" (four items). Conclusions: The produced checklist is a ready-to-use expert consensus­based tool for appraising the quality of educational content on lay-rescuer provision of adult BLS. The checklist gives content developers a tool to ensure educational resources comply with current resuscitation knowledge, and may serve as a component of a prospective standardized international framework for quality assurance in resuscitation education.

Dr. Google's Advice on First Aid: Evaluation of the Search Engine's Question-Answering System Responses to Queries Seeking Help in Health Emergencies.

INTRODUCTION: The ever-growing penetration of internet and mobile technologies into society suggests that people will increasingly use web searches to seek health-related information, including advice on first aid in medical emergencies. When a bystander is incompetent in first aid and has no immediate support from Emergency Medical Services (EMS), as it happens in low-resource settings or in disasters, instructions found online could be the sole driver for administering first aid before arrival of professional help. STUDY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate quality of advice on first aid generated by a web search engine's question-answering system (QAS) in response to search queries concerning provision of help in common health emergencies. METHODS: In December 2022-January 2023, an English-language search was carried out in Google with ten queries based on the keyword combinations (what to do OR how to help) AND (bleeding OR chest pain OR choking OR not breathing OR seizure). The search engine's QAS responses (up to 11 per search query) were evaluated for compliance with the International Federation of Red Cross First Aid Guidelines 2020 using the pre-developed checklists. RESULTS: Out of 98 QAS items generated by Google, 67.3% (n = 66) were excluded, mainly because the QAS answers did not address original queries. Eligible unique QAS responses (n = 27) showed poor coverage of the guideline-compliant instructions on first aid. Mean percentage of QAS responses providing a first aid instruction with complete adherence to the guidelines varied from 0.0 for choking to 19.5 for seizure. Only three (11.1%) QAS responses contained an explicit instruction to access EMS, while 66.7% (n = 18) included directions either contradictory to the guidelines and potentially harmful (eg, use of home remedies in chest pain) or inapplicable for an untrained person (eg, use of tourniquet in bleeding). CONCLUSION: Although the search engine's QAS responds to user's inquiries concerning assistance in health emergencies, the QAS-generated answers, as a rule, omit potentially life-saving evidence-based instructions on first aid and oftentimes give advices noncompliant with current guidelines or inadequate for untrained people, and thus create risks for causing harm to a victim.

Global prevalence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation training among the general public: a scoping review.

A scoping review was conducted to identify, map, and analyze international evidence from studies investigating the prevalence of community cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training. We searched major bibliographic databases and grey literature for original studies evaluating the prevalence of CPR training in the general population. Studies published from January 2000 to October 2020 were included without language or publication type restrictions. Seventy-three eligible papers reported a total of 61 population-based surveys conducted in 29 countries. More than three-fourths of the surveys were conducted in countries with high-income economies, and none in low-income countries. Over half of the surveys were at a subnational level. Globally, the proportion of laypeople trained in CPR varied greatly (median, 40%). For high-income countries, the median percentage was twice as high as that of upper middle-income countries (50% vs. 23%). The studies used heterogeneous survey methods and reporting patterns. Key methodological aspects were frequently not described. In summary, few studies have assessed CPR training prevalence among the general public. The rates of resuscitation training for the vast majority of countries remain unknown. High heterogeneity of studies precludes a reliable interpretation of the research. International Utstein-style consensus guidelines are needed to inform future research and reporting of public resuscitation training worldwide.

Availability of basic life support courses for the general populations in India, Nigeria and the United Kingdom: An internet-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: The number of lay people willing to attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in real life is increased by effective education in basic life support (BLS). However, little is known about access of general public to BLS training across the globe. This study aimed to investigate availability and key features of BLS courses proposed for lay people in India, Nigeria and the United Kingdom (UK). METHODS: A Google search was done in December 2018, using English keywords relevant for community resuscitation training. Ongoing courses addressing BLS and suitable for any adult layperson were included in the analysis. On-site training courses were limited to those provided within the country's territory. RESULTS: A total of 53, 29 and 208 eligible courses were found for India, Nigeria and the UK, respectively. In the UK, the number of courses per 10 million population (31.5) is 79 and 21 times higher than that in India (0.4) and Nigeria (1.5). Course geography is limited to 28% states and one union territory in India, 30% states and the Federal Capital Territory in Nigeria. In the UK, the training is offered in all constituent countries, with the highest prevalence in England. Courses are predominantly classroom-based, highly variable in duration, group size and instructors' qualifications. For India and Nigeria, mean cost of participation is exceeding the monthly minimum wage. CONCLUSION: In contrast to the UK, the availability and accessibility of BLS courses are critically limited in India and Nigeria, necessitating immediate interventions to optimize community CPR training and improve bystander CPR rates.