Editor’s Choice-Effects of targeted temperature management on mortality and neurological outcome: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review, and where applicable meta-analyses, examining the evidence underpinning the use of targeted temperature management following resuscitation from cardiac arrest. METHODS AND RESULTS: Multiple databases were searched for publications between January 2000-February 2016. Nine Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome questions were developed and meta-analyses were performed when appropriate. Reviewers extracted study data and performed quality assessments using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology, the Cochrane Risk Bias Tool, and the National Institute of Health Study Quality Assessment Tool. The primary outcomes for each Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome question were mortality and poor neurological outcome. Overall, low quality evidence demonstrated that targeted temperature management at 32-36°C, compared to no targeted temperature management, decreased mortality (risk ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.61-0.92) and poor neurological outcome (risk ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.60-0.88) amongst adult survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with an initial shockable rhythm. Targeted temperature management use did not benefit survivors of in-hospital cardiac arrest nor out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors with a non-shockable rhythm. Moderate quality evidence demonstrated no benefit of pre-hospital targeted temperature management initiation. Low quality evidence showed no difference between endovascular versus surface cooling targeted temperature management systems, nor any benefit of adding feedback control to targeted temperature management systems. Low quality evidence suggested that targeted temperature management be maintained for 18-24 h. CONCLUSIONS: Low quality evidence supports the in-hospital initiation and maintenance of targeted temperature management at 32-36°C amongst adult survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with an initial shockable rhythm for 18-24 h. The effects of targeted temperature management on other populations, the optimal rate and method of cooling and rewarming, and effects of fever require further study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".