A Meta-ethnography of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survivors’ Meanings on Life and Death
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survivors' physiological outcomes have been addressed, less is known on the holistic needs of individuals after OHCA, which hinders our ability to prioritize care around what really matters to survivors. AIM: The aim of this study was to interpretatively synthesize qualitative findings on OHCA survivors' perceptions and meanings of life and death and existential issues. METHODS: We used a meta-ethnographic synthesis of published qualitative studies addressing the experiences of OHCA survivors based on a systematic literature search (CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, PubMed). Studies were selected based on predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. The identified studies were subjected to a quality appraisal based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. RESULTS: Based on eligibility criteria, 6 phenomenological studies were included, of overall medium to high quality. One core theme, "the reality of death," and 4 main themes were identified: "redefining existence"; "revaluing death"; "being familiar with, yet oblivious of death"; and "living consciously." Emerging from the realization of death, the themes appeared to describe a gradual progression toward living consciously. CONCLUSIONS: An existential trajectory and a need for meaning are central in the experience of OHCA survivors. When existential issues are not addressed, the ongoing suffering may interfere with survivors' recovery and quality of life. Future research needs to address specific needs and ways to support survivors' meaning-making.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| 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 it