MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582999362 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1610493

Therapeutic Hypothermia after In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Children

2017· article· en· W2582999362 on OpenAlexaff
Frank W. Moler, Faye S. Silverstein, Richard Holubkov, Beth S. Slomine, James R. Christensen, Vinay Nadkarni, Kathleen L. Meert, Brittan Browning, Victoria L. Pemberton, Kent Page, Marianne Gildea, Barnaby R. Scholefield, Seetha Shankaran, Jamie Hutchison, John Berger, George Ofori‐Amanfo, Christopher J. L. Newth, Alexis Topjian, Joshua D. Koch, Nga Pham, Nikhil K. Chanani, José Pineda, Rick Harrison, Heidi J. Dalton, Jeffrey A. Alten, Charles L. Schleien, Denise M. Goodman, Jerry J. Zimmerman, Utpal Bhalala, Adam J. Schwarz, Melissa Porter, Samir Shah, Ericka L. Fink, Patrick S. McQuillen, Theodore Wu, Sophie Skellett, Neal J. Thomas, Jeffrey Nowak, Paul Baines, John Pappachan, Mudit Mathur, Eric Lloyd, Élise W. van der Jagt, Emily L. Dobyns, Michael T. Meyer, Ronald C. Sanders, Amy Clark, Jay B. Dean

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institutes of HealthNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineHypothermiaIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineMedical emergencyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Targeted temperature management is recommended for comatose adults and children after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; however, data on temperature management after in-hospital cardiac arrest are limited. METHODS: In a trial conducted at 37 children's hospitals, we compared two temperature interventions in children who had had in-hospital cardiac arrest. Within 6 hours after the return of circulation, comatose children older than 48 hours and younger than 18 years of age were randomly assigned to therapeutic hypothermia (target temperature, 33.0°C) or therapeutic normothermia (target temperature, 36.8°C). The primary efficacy outcome, survival at 12 months after cardiac arrest with a score of 70 or higher on the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, second edition (VABS-II, on which scores range from 20 to 160, with higher scores indicating better function), was evaluated among patients who had had a VABS-II score of at least 70 before the cardiac arrest. RESULTS: The trial was terminated because of futility after 329 patients had undergone randomization. Among the 257 patients who had a VABS-II score of at least 70 before cardiac arrest and who could be evaluated, the rate of the primary efficacy outcome did not differ significantly between the hypothermia group and the normothermia group (36% [48 of 133 patients] and 39% [48 of 124 patients], respectively; relative risk, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67 to 1.27; P=0.63). Among 317 patients who could be evaluated for change in neurobehavioral function, the change in VABS-II score from baseline to 12 months did not differ significantly between the groups (P=0.70). Among 327 patients who could be evaluated for 1-year survival, the rate of 1-year survival did not differ significantly between the hypothermia group and the normothermia group (49% [81 of 166 patients] and 46% [74 of 161 patients], respectively; relative risk, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.34; P=0.56). The incidences of blood-product use, infection, and serious adverse events, as well as 28-day mortality, did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among comatose children who survived in-hospital cardiac arrest, therapeutic hypothermia, as compared with therapeutic normothermia, did not confer a significant benefit in survival with a favorable functional outcome at 1 year. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; THAPCA-IH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00880087 .).

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations282
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207