Predictors of survival after cardiac or respiratory arrest in critical care units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Survival outcomes after cardiac or respiratory arrest occurring outside of intensive care units (ICUs) has been well described. We investigated survival outcomes of adults whose arrest occurred in ICUs and determined predictors of decreased survival. METHODS: We reviewed all records of adults who experienced cardiac or respiratory arrest from Jan. 1, 2000, to Apr. 30, 2005, in ICUs at four hospitals serving Edmonton, Alberta. We evaluated patient and clinical characteristics, as well as survival outcomes during a five-year follow-up period. We determined risk factors for immediate (within 24 hours) and later death. RESULTS: Of the 517 patients included in the study, 59.6% were able to be resuscitated, 30.4% survived to discharge from ICU, 26.9% survived to discharge from hospital, 24.3% survived to one year, and 15.9% survived to five years. Pulseless electrical activity or asystole was the most common rhythm (45.8% of the arrests). Survival was lowest among patients with an arrest due to pulseless electrical activity or asystole: only 10.6% survived to one year, compared with 36.3% who had other arrest rhythms (p < 0.001). Independent predictors of decreased later survival (eight months or more after arrest) were increasing age (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.09) and longer duration of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (adjusted HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.03-1.83, per additional logarithm of a minute of CPR). INTERPRETATION: Our study showed no major improvement in survival following cardiac arrest with pulseless electrical activity or asystole as the presenting rhythm in the ICU despite many advances in critical care over the previous two decades. The independent predictors of death within 24 hours after arrest in an ICU were sex, the presenting rhythm and the duration of CPR. Predictors of later death (eight months or more after arrest) were age and duration of CPR.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".