MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063271815 · doi:10.1080/10903120290938689

I MPACT OF P ROMPT D EFIBRILLATION ON C ARDIAC A RREST AT A M AJOR I NTERNATIONAL A IRPORT

2002· article· en· W2063271815 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePrehospital Emergency Care · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrewMedicineMedical emergencyBasic life supportEmergency medical servicesCardiopulmonary resuscitationAdvanced life supportAutomated external defibrillatorEmergency medicineResuscitationAeronauticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of a rapidly deployable, automated external defibrillator (AED)-equipped first-responder service at Boston's Logan International Airport on the rate of survival to hospital discharge after cardiac arrest. METHODS: A prospective observational outcome study was undertaken for cardiac arrests taking place on the airport grounds from January 1, 1995, to December 31, 1999. Patients were included if they were unresponsive, they had no palpable pulse and no spontaneous respirations, an AED was turned on, and the cardiac arrest took place on airport grounds. Airport fire rescue and emergency medical services (EMS) personnel submitted resuscitation records and AED memory modules for each cardiac arrest. Each author independently reviewed all cardiac arrest reports and code summaries to ensure accuracy and data integrity. Relevant dispatch and response times were determined from airport fire rescue and EMS dispatch records. Patient outcome was determined from hospital patient records. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: The airport fire rescue crew responded to 53 cardiac arrests. Of those, 38 met inclusion criteria. In 36 of 38 cases (94.7%), the airport fire rescue crew was first to apply the defibrillator, and the first to deliver a shock in 28 of 32 cases (87.5%) where a shock was delivered. The median response time for the airport fire rescue crew was 2 minutes, with a mode of 1 minute. The EMS response times were 5:29 (95% CI 4:37-6:19) for basic life support crews and 8:07 (95% CI 7:17-8:57) for advanced life support crews. All patients who survived to hospital admission (n = 15) and hospital discharge (n = 8) received their first shock by the airport fire rescue crew. Eight patients (21.1%) survived to hospital discharge. In five of the eight survivors to hospital discharge, defibrillation by the airport crew alone achieved a return of spontaneous circulation. CONCLUSIONS: A rapidly deployable first-responder service permits early defibrillation minutes before arrival of EMS personnel. This rapid response positively impacts the return of spontaneous circulation and survival to hospital discharge after cardiac arrest.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.250 · 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