MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070887933 · doi:10.1097/paf.0b013e3181df62ee

Do Resuscitation-Related Injuries Kill Infants and Children?

2010· article· en· W2070887933 on OpenAlexaff
Evan W. Matshes, Emma O. Lew

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Forensic Medicine & Pathology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChild Abuse and Related Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineResuscitationCardiopulmonary resuscitationIntubationAutopsyEndotracheal intubationEmergency medicinePediatricsSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Occasionally, individuals accused of inflicting fatal injuries on infants and young children will claim some variant of the "CPR defense," that is, they attribute the cause of injuries found at autopsy to their "untrained" resuscitative efforts. A 10-year (1994-2003) historical fixed cohort study of all pediatric forensic autopsies at the Miami-Dade County Medical Examiner Department was undertaken. To be eligible for inclusion in the study, children had to have died of atraumatic causes, with or without resuscitative efforts (N(atraumatic) = 546). Of these, 382 had a history of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR; average age of 4.17 years); 248 had CPR provided by trained individuals only; 133 had CPR provided by both trained and untrained individuals; 1 had CPR provided by untrained individuals only. There was no overlap between these 3 distinct groups. Twenty-two findings potentially attributable to CPR were identified in 19:15 cases of orofacial injuries compatible with attempted endotracheal intubation; 4 cases with focal pulmonary parenchymal hemorrhage; 1 case with prominent anterior mediastinal emphysema; and 2 cases with anterior chest abrasions. There were no significant hollow or solid thoracoabdominal organ injuries. There were no rib fractures. The estimated relative risk of injury subsequent to resuscitation was not statistically different between the subset of decedents whose resuscitative attempts were made by trained individuals only, and the subset who received CPR from both trained and untrained individuals. In the single case of CPR application by an untrained individual only, no injuries resulted. The remaining 164 children dying from nontraumatic causes and who did not undergo resuscitative efforts served as a control group; no injuries were identified. This study indicates that in the pediatric population, injuries secondary to resuscitative efforts are infrequent or rare, pathophysiologically inconsequential, and predominantly orofacial in location. In our population, CPR did not result in any rib fractures or significant visceral injuries. Participation of nonmedical or untrained individuals in resuscitation did not increase the likelihood of injury.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.521
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Forensic Medicine & PathologySame topicChild Abuse and Related TraumaFrench-language works237,207