The article published in JAMA can be found here:
The article is very interesting. It does identify some significant limitations but the research is really good with a large sample size. It seems that the problem with using AEDs in the hospital is the time it takes to identify the shockable rhythm, the time it takes to put the pads on, and smaller amount of current it emits on the first shock - as compared to the standard defibrillators.
One of the identified limitations of the articles was that they didn't determine who was using the AEDs in the hospital - what the level of expertise was. It could be that the person using it was inexperienced.
Overall, it still sounds like AEDs are a good idea - but defibrillators are better if they are readily available.
Thanks for bringing this new research to our attention!