Research story · published
Comparative Analysis of First Aid Awareness and Practices in Medical vs. Non-Medical University Students
Students valued first aid, but only about one in three reported formal training and several emergency responses remained inconsistent.
01
Why this matters
University students may be the first people present when someone faints, bleeds, chokes, has a seizure, or suffers a suspected spinal injury. This study shows a practical campus-safety gap: positive attitudes alone do not ensure safe action. Universities need hands-on training that reaches every discipline.
02
Study snapshot
- Design
- Cross-sectional educational assessment
- Sample
- 584
- Population
- 395 medical and 189 non-medical undergraduate students
- Setting
- Superior University, Lahore, Pakistan, 2025
- Measures
- Electronic questionnaire with 8 knowledge items, 7 attitude items, and reported emergency experiences; scale alphas 0.810 to 0.859
- Analysis
- Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and K-means cluster analysis in SPSS 26
203 of 584 students reported formal first-aid training.
03
Results, without the jargon
Students wanted first aid to be part of campus life, but many lacked structured training. Familiar actions, especially pressure for bleeding, were recognized more often than correct responses to bites, nosebleeds, seizures, choking, or suspected spinal injury. Medical background was associated with stronger knowledge and attitudes, but the paper does not provide the full group-level values needed to show the size of the difference. Awareness of campus resources also tracked with stronger knowledge.
Formal training
34.8% reported structured first-aid instruction.
Source: PDF Table 1, pages 4 to 5Correct bleeding response
502 students recognized firm pressure with a clean bandage.
Source: PDF Table 2, pages 5 to 6Correct bite cleaning
287 students selected soap and water for five minutes.
Source: PDF Table 2, pages 5 to 6Encountered a first-aid need
288 students had encountered a fellow student needing help; 225 said they provided aid.
Source: PDF Table 5, page 8Seated forward for nosebleed
Only 25.6% also reported pressure to the nostrils.
Source: PDF Table 5, page 9Background and knowledge cluster
Educational background was associated with the sample-derived knowledge clusters.
Source: PDF Table 7, pages 11 to 12Training and knowledge cluster
Reported formal training was not associated with knowledge cluster in Table 7.
Source: PDF Table 7, pages 11 to 1204
What this could mean
Universities could introduce short compulsory hands-on first-aid sessions for all students, with refreshers and scenario practice focused on the weak areas found here. Training should cover emergency numbers and campus resources. Future evaluation should test demonstrated skills before and after training rather than rely only on self-report.
05
Read this with the limitations
A cross-sectional survey cannot show cause. This single-university sample may not represent all Pakistani students. Knowledge, attitudes, encounters, and actions were self-reported. The sampling method is not clearly probability-based. Full medical versus non-medical tables and effect sizes are absent. K-means groups are sample-derived, not validated competency thresholds. The practice reliability estimate uses only 225 cases. The abstract claim above 80% conflicts with displayed attitude values of 65.2% to 73.8%. Final page range and receipt chronology require journal confirmation.
06
How I contributed
I helped lead the research and publication process, including coordinating the team, guiding student researchers, strengthening the methodology, supporting analysis and interpretation, and developing the manuscript for submission. I also helped translate the findings into practical recommendations that students and universities can use.
07
Explore and cite the paper
Sidhu T, Afzal A, Malik MUR, Asad A, Asghar T, Khan S. Comparative Analysis of First Aid Awareness and Practices in Medical vs. Non-Medical University Students. Pakistan Journal of Medicine and Dentistry. 2025;14(4). doi:10.36283/ziun-pjmd14-4/102.
This is a plain-language research summary, not personal medical advice. Interpret findings in the context of the design and limitations.