MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Association Between Duration of Resuscitation and Favorable Outcome After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

2016· article· en· W2532224322 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua C. Reynolds, Brian Grunau, Jon C. Rittenberger, Kelly N. Sawyer, Michael C. Kurz, Clifton W. Callaway

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsMedicineResuscitationDuration (music)Cardiopulmonary resuscitationEmergency medicineAssociation (psychology)Clinical deathOutcome (game theory)Internal medicineCardiologyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Little evidence guides the appropriate duration of resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and case features justifying longer or shorter durations are ill defined. We estimated the impact of resuscitation duration on the probability of favorable functional outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest using a large, multicenter cohort. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a North American, single-blind, multicenter, cluster-randomized, clinical trial (ROC-PRIMED [Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Prehospital Resuscitation Using an Impedance Valve and Early Versus Delayed]) of consecutive adults with nontraumatic, emergency medical services-treated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Primary exposure was duration of resuscitation in minutes (onset of professional resuscitation to return of spontaneous circulation [ROSC] or termination of resuscitation). Primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge with favorable outcome (modified Rankin scale [mRS] score of 0-3). Subjects were additionally classified as survival with unfavorable outcome (mRS score of 4-5), ROSC without survival (mRS score of 6), or without ROSC. Subject accrual was plotted as a function of resuscitation duration, and the dynamic probability of favorable outcome at discharge was estimated for the whole cohort and subgroups. Adjusted logistic regression models tested the association between resuscitation duration and survival with favorable outcome. RESULTS: The primary cohort included 11 368 subjects (median age, 69 years [interquartile range, 56-81 years]; 7121 men [62.6%]). Of these, 4023 (35.4%) achieved ROSC, 1232 (10.8%) survived to hospital discharge, and 905 (8.0%) had an mRS score of 0 to 3 at discharge. Distribution of cardiopulmonary resuscitation duration differed by outcome (P<0.00001). For cardiopulmonary resuscitation duration up to 37.0 minutes (95% confidence interval, 34.9-40.9 minutes), 99% with an eventual mRS score of 0 to 3 at discharge achieved ROSC. The dynamic probability of an mRS score of 0 to 3 at discharge declined over elapsed resuscitation duration, but subjects with initial shockable cardiac rhythm, witnessed cardiac arrest, and bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation were more likely to survive with favorable outcome after prolonged efforts (30-40 minutes). After adjustment for prehospital (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-0.95) and inpatient (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.99) covariates, resuscitation duration was associated with survival to discharge with an mRS score of 0 to 3. CONCLUSIONS: Shorter resuscitation duration was associated with likelihood of favorable outcome at hospital discharge. Subjects with favorable case features were more likely to survive prolonged resuscitation up to 47 minutes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00394706.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations254
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207