MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012723931 · doi:10.3109/10903121003770639

Delayed Prehospital Implementation of the 2005 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiac Care

2010· article· en· W2012723931 on OpenAlexafffund
Blair L. Bigham, Kent M. Koprowicz, Tom P. Aufderheide, Daniel P. Davis, Stuart Donn, Judy Powell, Brian Suffoletto, Sarah Nafziger, John Stouffer, Ahamed H. Idris, Laurie J. Morrison

Bibliographic record

VenuePrehospital Emergency Care · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersInstitute of Circulatory and Respiratory HealthHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Public Health ServiceAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary resuscitationEmergency medical servicesMedical emergencyEmergency medicineResuscitationIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: In 2005, the American Heart Association (AHA) released guidelines to improve survival rates from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). OBJECTIVE: To determine if, and when, emergency medical services (EMS) agencies participating in the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) implemented these guidelines. METHODS: We contacted 178 EMS agencies and completed structured telephone interviews with 176 agencies. The survey collected data on specific treatment protocols before and after implementation of the 2005 guidelines as well as the date of implementation crossover (the "crossover date"). The crossover date was then linked to a database describing the size, type, and structure of each agency. Descriptive statistics and regression were used to examine patterns in time to crossover. RESULTS: The 2005 guidelines were implemented by 174 agencies (99%). The number of days from guideline release to implementation was as follows: mean 416 (standard deviation 172), median 415 (range 49-750). There was no difference in time to implementation in fire-based agencies (mean 432), nonfire municipal agencies (mean 365), and private agencies (mean 389, p = 0.31). Agencies not providing transport took longer to implement than agencies that transported patients (463 vs. 384 days, p = 0.004). Agencies providing only basic life support (BLS) care took longer to implement than agencies who provided advanced life support (ALS) care (mean 462 vs. 397 days, p = 0.03). Larger agencies (>10 vehicles) were able to implement the guidelines more quickly than smaller agencies (mean 386 vs. 442 days, p = 0.03). On average, it took 8.9 fewer days to implement the guidelines for every 50% increase in EMS-treated runs/year to which an agency responded. CONCLUSION: ROC EMS agencies required an average of 416 days to implement the 2005 AHA guidelines for OHCA. Small EMS agencies, BLS-only agencies, and nontransport agencies took longer than large agencies, agencies providing ALS care, and transport agencies, respectively, to implement the guidelines. Causes of delays to guideline implementation and effective methods for rapid EMS knowledge translation deserve investigation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations69
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrehospital Emergency CareSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207