MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143049601 · doi:10.1197/j.aem.2007.06.021

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Dispatch‐assisted Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Instructions

2007· article· en· W2143049601 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

VenueAcademic Emergency Medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalChildren’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary resuscitationDefibrillationVentricular fibrillationBasic life supportAdvanced life supportResuscitationEmergency medical servicesVentilation (architecture)Emergency medicineVentricular tachycardiaObservational studyAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency of agonal breathing during cardiac arrest (CA), its impact on the ability of 9-1-1 dispatchers to identify CA, and the impact of dispatch-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) instructions on bystander CPR rates. METHODS: A before-after observational study enrolling out-of-hospital adult CA patients where resuscitation was attempted in a single city with basic life support with defibrillation/advanced life support tiered emergency medical services. Victim, caller, and system characteristics were measured during two successive nine-month periods before (control group) and after (intervention group) the introduction of dispatch-assisted CPR instructions. RESULTS: There were 529 CAs between July 1, 2003, and December 31, 2004. Victim characteristics were similar in the control (n = 295) and intervention (n = 234) period; mean age was 68.3 years; 66.7% were male; 50.1% of CAs were witnessed; call-to-vehicle stop was 6 minutes, 37 seconds; ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia occurred in 29.9%; and the survival rate was 4.0%. Dispatchers identified 56.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 48.9% to 63.0%) of CA cases; agonal breathing was present in 37.0% (95% CI = 30.1% to 43.9%) of all CA cases and accounted for 50.0% (95% CI = 39.1% to 60.9%) of missed diagnoses. Callers provided ventilations in 17.2% and chest compressions in 8.3% of cases as a result of the intervention. Long time intervals were observed between call to diagnosis (2 minutes, 38 seconds) and during ventilation instructions (2 minutes, 5 seconds). Bystander CPR rates increased from 16.7% in the control phase to 26.4% in the intervention phase (absolute rate, 9.7%; 95% CI = 8.5% to 11.3%; p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: This trial demonstrates an increase in bystander CPR rate after the introduction of dispatch-assisted CPR. Agonal breathing occurred frequently and had a negative impact on the recognition of CA. There were long time intervals between call initiation and diagnosis of CA and during mouth-to-mouth ventilation instructions.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.353 · 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