Differences in the clinical practice of small animal CPR before and after the release of the RECOVER guidelines: Results from two electronic surveys (2008 and 2017) in the United States and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the clinical approach to CPR has changed following the publication of the Reassessment Campaign on Veterinary Resuscitation (RECOVER) guidelines in 2012. DESIGN: Internet-based survey. SETTING: Academia and referral practice. SUBJECTS: Four hundred and ninety-one small animal veterinarians in clinical practice in the United States and Canada. INTERVENTIONS: An internet-based survey assessing the clinical approach to small animal CPR was circulated with the assistance of veterinary professional organizations on 2 separate occasions: prior to (2008) and following (2017) publication of the 2012 (RECOVER) guidelines. Survey questions identical to both surveys solicited details of clinician approaches to CPR preparedness, basic life support (BLS), and advanced life support (ALS). Respondents were grouped into level of expertise (board-certified specialists [BCS, n = 202] and general practitioners in emergency clinics [GPE, n = 289]), and year of response to the survey (2008, n = 171; 2017, n = 320). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Compliance with the RECOVER guidelines pertaining to CPR preparedness (P < 0.01), BLS (P < 0.01), and ALS P < 0.01) was consistently higher in respondents to the 2017 survey compared to those of the 2008 survey. Being a BCS was associated with significantly higher compliance with the RECOVER recommendations than GPE in the domains of preparedness (P = 0.02), BLS (P < 0.01), and ALS (P < 0.01). Increases in age of the respondent had a negative effect on compliance with the BLS guidelines (P < 0.01), while gender had no effect. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to 2008, current practices in small animal CPR in the North American emergency and critical care community shifted toward those recommended in the RECOVER guidelines across all CPR domains. This supports the notion that uptake of the RECOVER guidelines among veterinary emergency or critical care clinicians was sufficient to lead to a change in the practice of CPR.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".