MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 8: Influence of Receiving Hospital Characteristics on Survival after Cardiac Arrest

2008· article· en· W3029198883 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Clifton W. Callaway, Rob Schmicker, Mitch Kampmeyer, Judy Powell, Graham Nichol, Thomas D. Rea, Mohamud Daya, Tom P. Aufderheide, Dan P Davis, Jon C. Rittenberger, Ahamed H. Idris

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReturn of spontaneous circulationCardiopulmonary resuscitationHospital dischargeProportional hazards modelEmergency medicineCardiac catheterizationInternal medicinePsychological interventionCardiologyResuscitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hospital management of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) can influence patient survival via interventions such as hypothermia and cardiac catheterization (CATH). This study tested the hypothesis that survival differed between different types of hospitals for subjects with ROSC after OHCA. Methods: Adult (≥ 18 years) subjects with paramedic-documented ROSC or who lived >1 day after OHCA were identified with their receiving hospital in a prospective database from 9 regions in the US and Canada. Hospitals were characterized using the American Hospital Directory or the Guide to Canadian Healthcare Facilities. Hospitals were categorized by bed number (large >400; medium 250 – 400; small <250) and CATH capability. Associations between clinical variables, hospital categories, survival time, and survival to hospital discharge were determined using Cox regression and analysis of variance. Results: Between December 2005 and July 2007, 3644 OHCA subjects were treated in 254 hospitals, with similar numbers in large (1026), medium (1094) and small (1276) hospitals. CATH hospitals treated 2123 (58%) subjects, and patient features (63% male, 42% VF/VT, 67% witnessed collapse, and mean call-arrival interval of 5.7 (SD 2.8) minutes) did not differ between hospital categories. CATH hospitals had higher survival than non-CATH hospitals in large (35.1% vs. 27.7%), medium (34.4% vs. 30.7%) and small (38.6% vs. 26.5%) categories (F=19.55; p<0.001). VF/VT (p < 0.001), age (p < 0.001) and witnessed collapse (p < 0.001) were associated with survival time. When adjusted for initial rhythm, call-arrival interval, witnessed collapse, age, sex, region, teaching institution, and trauma center level, there was no significant effect of CATH. However, the interaction of large hospital and CATH was associated with lower hazard of death (0.71, 95% CI [0.54, 0.93]). Conclusions: Transport to a CATH hospital is associated with increased probability of survival to discharge after OHCA. These data cannot determine whether cardiac catheterization was performed or if CATH hospital is a surrogate for more comprehensive cardiac care. Therefore, further work should examine what aspects of in-hospital care affected outcome.

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)0.001
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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