The prognostic significance of repeated prehospital shocks for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Patients suffering from an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) associated with an initial shockable rhythm have a better prognosis than their counterparts. The implications of recurrent or refractory malignant arrhythmia in such context remain unclear. The objective of this study is to evaluate the association between the number of prehospital shocks delivered and survival to hospital discharge among patients in OHCA. METHODS: This cohort study included adult patients with an initial shockable rhythm over a 5-year period from a registry of OHCA in Montreal, Canada. The relationship between the number of prehospital shocks delivered and survival to discharge was described using dynamic probabilities. The association between the number of prehospital shocks delivered and survival to discharge was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 1,788 patients (78% male with a mean age of 64 years) were included in this analysis, of whom 536 (30%) received treatments from an advanced care paramedic. A third of the cohort (583 patients, 33%) survived to hospital discharge. The probability of survival was highest with the first shock (33% [95% confidence interval 30%-35%]), but decreased to 8% (95% confidence interval 4%-13%) following nine shocks. A higher number of prehospital shocks was independently associated with lower odds of survival (adjusted odds ratio=0.88 [95% confidence interval 0.85-0.92], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Survival remains possible even after a high number of shocks for patients suffering from an OHCA with an initial shockable rhythm. However, requiring more shocks is independently associated with worse survival.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".