MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211700795 · doi:10.1136/tsaco-2021-000817

Neurological outcomes after traumatic cardiopulmonary arrest: a systematic review

2021· review· en· W3211700795 on OpenAlex
Daniel Shi, Christie McLaren, Chris Evans

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTrauma Surgery & Acute Care Open · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersQueen's University
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyPopulationCINAHLTraumatic brain injuryMEDLINEIntensive care medicineSystematic reviewPediatricsPsychological interventionEmergency medicinePhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite appropriate care, most patients do not survive traumatic cardiac arrest, and many survivors suffer from permanent neurological disability. The prevalence of non-dismal neurological outcomes remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current review is to summarize and assess the quality of reporting of the neurological outcomes in traumatic cardiac arrest survivors. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of Embase, Medline, PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and ProQuest databases was performed from inception of the database to July 2020. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Observational cohort studies that reported neurological outcomes of patients surviving traumatic cardiac arrest were included. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Patients who were resuscitated following traumatic cardiac arrest. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: The quality of the included studies was assessed using ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies - of Interventions) for observational studies. RESULTS: From 4295 retrieved studies, 40 were included (n=23 644 patients). The survival rate was 9.2% (n=2168 patients). Neurological status was primarily assessed at discharge. Overall, 45.8% of the survivors had good or moderate neurological recovery, 29.0% had severe neurological disability or suffered a vegetative state, and 25.2% had missing neurological outcomes. Seventeen studies qualitatively described neurological outcomes based on patient disposition and 23 studies used standardized outcome scales. 28 studies had a serious risk of bias and 12 had moderate risk of bias. LIMITATIONS: The existing literature is characterized by inadequate outcome reporting and a high risk of bias, which limit our ability to prognosticate in this patient population. CONCLUSIONS OR IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Good and moderate neurological recoveries are frequently reported in patients who survive traumatic cardiac arrest. Prospective studies focused on quality of survivorship in traumatic arrest are urgently needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review, level IV. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020198482.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.007
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.306 · 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