MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3176054758 · doi:10.1161/circ.140.suppl_2.291

Abstract 291: Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Prior to Arrival of Emergency Medical Services in Arizona Extended Care Facilities

2019· article· en· W3176054758 on OpenAlexaff
Steven A. Maher, Amber D Rice, Joshua B. Gaither, Chengcheng Hu, Margaret Mullins, Daniel W. Spaite, Bentley J. Bobrow

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsBentley (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary resuscitationEmergency medical servicesInterquartile rangeReturn of spontaneous circulationEmergency medicinePopulationResuscitationLogistic regressionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Extended care facilities (ECFs) house unique patient populations with increased risk of out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and with unique, generally medically trained first responders initiating care prior to arrival of emergency medical services (EMS). However, little is known about bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and resuscitation outcomes in this population. Our aim is to assess rate of CPR delivery prior to EMS arrival in cases of OHCA among residents ECFs across the state of Arizona. Methods: Cases of OHCA between 2016-2018, cared for by participating Arizona EMS agencies, were included if OHCA occurred at an ECF, age 18+, and was of presumed cardiac etiology. Association between survival status at discharge and bystander CPR was examined first by Chi-squared test then by logistic regression, which adjusted for important risk factors and potential confounders including: age, gender, witnessed arrest, shockable initial rhythm, and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in EMS care. Results: There were 1,046 cases included in this study after excluding 32 cases with DNR and 11 with unknown bystander CPR status. Median patient age was 74 (interquartile range 64, 83). The overall rate of CPR prior to EMS arrival was 78.4% (95% CI, 75.8%, 80.9%). Survival to hospital discharge and survival with favorable neurologic outcome were not different between nursing home patients who received CPR prior to EMS arrival and those who did not [6.2% vs. 4.4% (p = 0.34) and 3.1% vs. 1.8% (p = 0.29)]. There was no statistically significant difference in the adjusted analysis. Conclusions: In this study population CPR was commonly delivered prior to EMS arrival. However, delivery of CPR prior to EMS arrival was not associated with survival to hospital discharge or favorable neurologic outcome. The lack of positive association between CPR prior to arrival and survival to hospital discharge may be related to comorbid factors present in ECF patients or differences in the time between collapse and initiation of CPR. Further study is needed to identify factors that might improve survival in this unique population.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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