MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994839673 · doi:10.1089/ham.2019.0047

Evaluation of the Quality of Manual, Compression-Only Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in a Moving Ski Patrol Toboggan

2019· article· en· W2994839673 on OpenAlexaff
Terry Abrams, Lois Torfason

Bibliographic record

VenueHigh Altitude Medicine & Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory ServicesAlberta Health ServicesCARE CanadaCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiopulmonary resuscitationMedicineResuscitationAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) quality may be impacted by location and setting of an out of hospital cardiac arrest. This study compared the quality of CPR performed on a moving ski patrol toboggan versus stationary CPR, both performed outdoors in winter. Materials and Methods: Compression-only CPR was performed on a manikin attached to a backboard secured into a toboggan. A CPR device was used to measure compression rate, depth and recoil, and elapsed time. A convenience sample of 30 patrollers, in weather-appropriate clothing, participated in this nonrandomized, crossover study. Each first performed 5 continuous sets of 30 compressions of stationary CPR straddling the manikin while kneeling. After 15 minutes rest, participants performed CPR while moving down the designated ski run (fixed length, vertical drop, and slope angles). Each ski run was video captured with a GoPro camera. Quality was defined as compliance with 2015 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) guidelines for CPR. Results: Overall, stationary and moving chest compressions complied with ILCOR guidelines, but there was a statistically significant degradation of CPR quality while moving and over time. Fewer compressions met ILCOR guidelines in comparison to stationary CPR compressions: (1) stationary mean depth 87% compliant, moving mean depth 35% compliant, 95% confidence interval: 39–65 ( p < 0.001); (2) stationary mean rate 90% while moving mean rate 64% compliant; and (3) stationary recoil 74%, while moving recoil 77% compliant. Noncompliant compressions were typically too shallow, and noncompliance for rate was typically too fast. There were no pauses over 10 seconds once compressions were started. Conclusions: Despite CPR quality being reduced while moving, there were sufficient compliant compressions to support the use of CPR in this setting. Maintaining regular CPR training in a working environment and optimal body position in relation to the patient may be keys to performing high quality CPR on a moving toboggan.

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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigh Altitude Medicine & BiologySame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207