Cognitive impairment and psychopathology in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors in Denmark: The REVIVAL cohort study protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cognitive impairment and psychopathology caused by brain hypoxia and the traumatic impact of critical illness are common in cardiac arrest survivors and can lead to negative consequences of everyday life functioning, and further impact mental health in relatives. Most studies have dealt with the mere survival rate after cardiac arrest and not with long-term consequences to mental health in cardiac arrest survivors. Importantly, we face a gap in our knowledge about suitable screening tools in the early post-arrest phase for long-term risk prediction of mental health problems. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of a novel screening procedure to predict risk of disabling cognitive impairment and psychopathology 3 months after cardiac arrest. Furthermore, the study aims to evaluate long-term prevalence of psychopathology in relatives. METHODS AND ANALYSES: In this multicentre prospective cohort study, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors and their relatives will be recruited. The post-arrest screening includes the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) and the Acute Stress Disorder Interview (ASDI) and is conducted during hospitalisation. In a subsample of the patients, functional MRI is done, and cortisol determination collected. At 3-month follow-up, the primary study outcomes for 200 survivors include the Danish Affective Verbal Learning Test-26 (VAMT-26), Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System tests (trail making, colour-word interference, word and design fluency), Rey's Complex Figure and Letter-number sequencing subtest of Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV, HADS and IES-R. For the relatives, they include HADS and IES-R. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is approved by the local regional Research Ethics Committee (H-18046155) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (RH-2017-325, j.no.05961) and follows the latest version of the Declaration of Helsinki. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and may impact the follow-up of cardiac arrest survivors.
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".