Termination of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Mountain Rescue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim was to establish scientifically supported recommendations for termination of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in mountain rescue, which can be applied by physicians and nonphysicians. A literature search was performed; the results and recommendations were discussed among the authors, and finally approved by the International Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MEDCOM) in October 2011. 4166 abstracts were reviewed; of these, 96 were relevant for this article and are included in this literature review. In mountain rescue, CPR may be withheld or terminated in a patient with absent vital signs when the risk is unacceptable to the rescuer, the rescuer is exhausted or in extreme environments where CPR is not possible or any of the following apply: decapitation; truncal transection; whole body incinerated, decomposed, or frozen solid; avalanche victim in asystole with obstructed airway and burial time >35 min. Also, CPR may be terminated when all of the following criteria apply: unwitnessed loss of vital signs, no return of spontaneous circulation during 20 min of CPR, no shock advised at any time by AED or only asystole on ECG, and no hypothermia or other special circumstances warranting extended CPR. In situations where transport is not possible, mitigation of special circumstances is not possible, and further resuscitation is futile, CPR should be terminated. Medical directors of rescue teams should interpret these recommendations in the context of local conditions and laws, and create team-specific training and protocols for determining when to withhold and terminate CPR in a patient with absent vital signs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".