MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 15131: Early Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Therapy for Perceived Neurological Prognosis is Associated With Excess Mortality After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

2015· article· en· W3023811872 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Elmer, Cesar Daniel Torres, Tom P. Aufderheide, Michael Austin, Clifton W. Callaway, Eyal Golan, Heather Herren, Jamie Jasti, Peter J. Kudenchuk, Damon C. Scales, Dion Stub, Derek Richardson, Dana Zive

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of TorontoOttawa Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy because of perceived poor neurological prognosis (WLST-N) is a common cause of death after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Guidelines recommend against WLST-N before 72 h (WLST-N<72), but WLST-N<72 remains common and may increase mortality. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium’s PRIMED trial including adults surviving >1h after hospital arrival. Our main exposure was WLST-N<72, which was collected for the original trial by chart review. Outcomes were survival to hospital discharge and functionally favorable survival (modified Rankin Score ≤ 3). We used two methods to determine predicted outcomes in the cohort exposed to WLST-N<72 if WLST-N were delayed until after 72h. First, we used pre-exposure covariates to create a propensity score modeling the probability of exposure to WLST-N<72 and propensity-matched exposed to unexposed subjects, treating subjects with WLST-N after 72h as unexposed. We then determined the probability of survival and functionally favorable survival in the unexposed matched cohort. Second, we fit adjusted logistic regression models using data from the unexposed cohort and used these models to predict outcomes in the exposed cohort. Results: Of 16,875 OHCA subjects, 4,265 (25%) met inclusion criteria. Of these, 1,490 (35%) survived to discharge and 1101 (26%) had a functionally favorable survival. WLST-N occurred in 1626 (59% of non-survivors), most commonly on hospital day 1, and 919 (33% of non-survivors) were exposed to WLST-N<72. After matching, there were no differences between the exposed and unexposed groups. In adjusted analyses, exposed subjects had an estimated 25-26% chance of survival and 16% functionally favorable survival had they not received WLST-N<72. Conclusion: In this large North American cohort, death associated with WLST-N<72 was common. Extrapolating to national epidemiological data, our findings indicate that approximately 4,500 Americans annually who would otherwise survive to discharge instead die because of WLST-N<72, nearly 2,900 (64%) of whom might have had functional recovery. Reducing WLST-N<72 may be an important means to decrease mortality after OHCA and improve public health.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→