MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2265950451

Abstract 17: Prehospital Interventions Associated with Survival from Traumatic Cardiac Arrest

2014· article· en· W2265950451 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Evans, Ashley Petersen, Martin A. Schreiber, Delores Kannas, Jason E. Buick, Michael Austin, Dylan Dean

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of TorontoQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThoracostomyIntubationPenetrating traumaPopulationEmergency medicineBlunt traumaAdvanced life supportOdds ratioEmergency medical servicesBluntAnesthesiaSurgeryResuscitationCardiopulmonary resuscitationInternal medicinePneumothorax
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traumatic cardiac arrest has traditionally been associated with a dismal prognosis, but emerging evidence suggests that survival may be better than expected. The objectives for this study were to 1) describe the contemporary management and outcomes of traumatic arrest; and 2) identify prehospital interventions associated with survival to hospital discharge. We completed a secondary analysis of traumatic arrest cases in the ROC Epistry-Trauma and PROPHET registries. Patients were included if they suffered a blunt or penetrating injury and received chest compressions in the field, regardless of whether they were ultimately transported to the hospital. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to generate odds ratios for survival to hospital discharge for the following interventions: advanced life support care, prehospital times, bag-mask ventilation, intubation, supraglottic airway, needle thoracostomy, hemorrhage control, and IV/IO fluids. The study population included 2248 traumatic arrest patients who were predominately young (mean 39 ± 20 years), males (78%), with blunt injuries (68%), without vital signs on EMS arrival (67%), and attended to by advanced life support paramedic crews (87%). A total of 193 patients (8.6%) survived to hospital discharge. More patients with blunt trauma (11%) compared to penetrating trauma (4.5%) survived. The majority (87%) of survivors had at least one vital sign on EMS arrival. Frequently performed procedures were bag-mask ventilation (86%), intubation (55%), and IV fluids (53%). All other procedures were performed in ≤ 15% of patients. Bag-mask ventilation (adjusted OR: 0.26, 95% CI 0.15, 0.44), intubation (adjusted OR: 0.45, 95% CI 0.265 to 0.764), and hemorrhage control (adjusted OR: 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.93) were all associated with a decreased odds of surviving to hospital discharge following blunt traumatic arrest. No other procedures significantly altered the odds of surviving to hospital discharge. We conclude that survival from traumatic arrest may be higher than previously thought, particularly in blunt trauma, and in those with at least one vital sign on EMS arrival. Frequently performed prehospital interventions were not associated with improved survival from traumatic 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→