A 2-year prospective cohort study of cardiac resuscitation in a major Canadian hospital.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the outcome of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for in-hospital cardiac arrest and to identify risk factors associated with survival to the time of hospital discharge. DESIGN: A 2-year prospective cohort study. SETTING: Foothills Medical Centre, a 700-bed tertiary, academic and regional referral centre for Calgary and southern Alberta. PATIENTS: Adult inpatients, excluding those who had cardiac arrest in the Emergency Department or operating room. INTERVENTION: Cardiac resuscitation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Spontaneous return of the pulse with a minimum systolic blood pressure of 80 mm Hg and survival defined as survival to the time of hospital discharge. RESULTS: In 334 patients there were 390 cardiac arrests, of which 200 were primary cardiac arrests and 39 cardiac arrests that occurred while the resuscitation team was in attendance. Of 239 resuscitated patients, 51 (21.3%) survived. Fifteen variables were identified as being associated with survival. This association could be explained, through multivariate analysis, by the effect of the following 3 variables (odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI]): initial observed rhythm other than pulseless electrical activity or asystole (OR 17.34, 95% CI 8.2 to 36.8); a patient who was ambulatory and able to provide self-care (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.9 to 7.5); and a spontaneous return of circulation with resuscitation in less than 20 minutes (OR 12.9, 95% CI 4.8 to 20.7). CONCLUSIONS: Survival to hospital discharge after cardiac arrest remains static. Initial cardiac rhythm and duration of resuscitation before spontaneous return of circulation were the most important risk factors for survival. These factors and the patient's functional status are relevant when discussing cardiac resuscitation with patients or when considering whether to discontinue resuscitation efforts.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".