MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734691862 · doi:10.1097/sih.0000000000000245

Effect of Emergency Department Mattress Compressibility on Chest Compression Depth Using a Standardized Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Board, a Slider Transfer Board, and a Flat Spine Board

2017· article· en· W2734691862 on OpenAlex
Adam Cheng, Claudia Belanger, Brandi Wan, Jennifer Davidson, Yiqun Lin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSimulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAlberta Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiopulmonary resuscitationCompression (physics)MedicineOn boardResuscitationMaterials scienceAnesthesiaComposite materialEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed on a mattress decreases effective chest compression depth. Using a CPR board partially attenuates mattress compressibility. We aimed to determine the effect of a CPR board, a slider transfer board, a CPR board with a slider transfer board, and a flat spine board on chest compression depth with a mannequin placed on an emergency department mattress. METHODS: The study used a cross-over study design. The CPR-certified healthcare providers performed 2 minutes of compressions on a mannequin in five conditions, an emergency department mattress with: (a) no hard surface, (b) a CPR board, (c) a slider transfer board, (d) a CPR board and slider transfer board, and (e) a flat spine board. Compression depths were measured from two sources for each condition: (a) an internal device measuring sternum-to-spine compression and (b) an external device measuring sternum-to-spine compression plus mattress compression. The difference of the two measures (ie, depleted compression depth) was summarized and compared between conditions. RESULTS: A total of 10,203 individual compressions from 10 participants were analyzed. The mean depleted compression depths (percentage depletion) secondary to mattress effect were the following: 23.6 mm (29.7%) on a mattress only, 13.7 mm (19.5%) on a CPR board, 16.9 mm (23.1%) on a slider transfer board, 11.9 mm (17.3%) on a slider transfer board plus backboard, and 10.3 mm (15.4%) on a flat spine board. The differences in percentage depletion across conditions were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation providers should use a CPR board and slider transfer board or a flat spine board alone because these conditions are associated with the smallest amount of mattress compressibility.

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.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.877

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.353 · 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