MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156207093 · doi:10.1155/2013/274814

Maternal Cardiac Arrest: A Practical and Comprehensive Review

2013· article· en· W2156207093 on OpenAlexaff
Farida M. Jeejeebhoy, Laurie J. Morrison

Bibliographic record

VenueEmergency Medicine International · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalWilliam Osler Health SystemUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary resuscitationPreparednessMedical emergencyResuscitationEmergency departmentEmergency managementPregnancySudden cardiac arrestIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineNursingCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac arrest during pregnancy is a dedicated chapter in the American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care; however, a robust maternal cardiac arrest knowledge translation strategy and emergency response plan is not usually the focus of institutional emergency preparedness programs. Although maternal cardiac arrest is rare, the emergency department is a high-risk area for receiving pregnant women in either prearrest or full cardiac arrest. It is imperative that institutions review and update emergency response plans for a maternal arrest. This review highlights the most recent science, guidelines, and recommended implementation strategies related to a maternal arrest. The aim of this paper is to increase the understanding of the important physiological differences of, and management strategies for, a maternal cardiac arrest, as well as provide institutions with the most up-to-date literature on which they can build emergency preparedness programs for a maternal 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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations36
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmergency Medicine InternationalSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207