Study of Pre-Hospital Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Outcomes and Relevant Factors in Ardabil City between 2012 and 2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) is a procedure which was done both in hospital or pre-hospital in order to return life after clinical death. Although the most cardiac attacks happen out of hospital, but there are lack of existing studies related to CPR assessment in pre-hospital conditions. Then this study carried out in order to show the outcome of pre-hospital CPR procedures and its related factors in Medical Emergency Centers of Ardebil city. METHOD: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted on 272 CPR cases in the Emergency Medical Center (EMS) in Ardabil, between 2012 and 2013. The researcher-made questionnaire was used. For data analyzing the descriptive and analytical statistical method such as the Chi-square test and the Chi-square details test were used with SPSS 16 software. The values of P<0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: The overall rate of successful CPR reported only 19.1%. The mean (SD) of patient’s age was 74.19±79.60 years and the most of them (66.2%) were men. The most patients (64.3%), had heart problems as a chief complaint. From all CPRs, 83.1% and 11.5% were done in patient homes and public place respectively. There was no statistically significant relationship between the successful CPR with age (p=0.15), sex (p=0.44), the arrival time of emergency personnel to the scene (p=0.98) and patient’s pulse rate (p=0.52). But there was statistically significant relationship between the successful CPR with underlying diseases (p=0.003), Location of CPR (P=0.002), patient blood pressure (p=0.00) and patient respiratory rate (p=0.04). CONCLUSION: According to the findings, the rate of successful CPR was at a low level in the pre-hospital that need to be investigated further about its cause and its related factors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".