Bystander interventions and survival after exercise-related sudden cardiac arrest: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the provision of bystander interventions and rates of survival after exercise-related sudden cardiac arrest (SCA). DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Cochrane Library and grey literature sources were searched from inception to November/December 2020. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Observational studies assessing a population of exercise-related SCA (out-of-hospital cardiac arrests that occurred during exercise or within 1 hour of cessation of activity), where bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and/or automated external defibrillator (AED) use were reported, and survival outcomes were ascertained. METHODS: Among all included studies, the median (IQR) proportions of bystander CPR and bystander AED use, as well as median (IQR) rate of survival to hospital discharge, were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 29 studies were included in this review, with a median study duration of 78.7 months and a median sample size of 91. Most exercise-related SCA patients were male (median: 92%, IQR: 86%-96%), middle-aged (median: 51, IQR: 39-56 years), and presented with a shockable arrest rhythm (median: 78%, IQR: 62%-86%). Bystander CPR was initiated in a median of 71% (IQR: 59%-87%) of arrests, whereas bystander AED use occurred in a median of 31% (IQR: 19%-42%) of arrests. Among the 19 studies that reported survival to hospital discharge, the median rate of survival was 32% (IQR: 24%-49%). Studies which evaluated the relationship between bystander interventions and survival outcomes reported that both bystander CPR and AED use were associated with survival after exercise-related SCA. CONCLUSION: Exercise-related SCA occurs predominantly in males and presents with a shockable ventricular arrhythmia in most cases, emphasising the importance of rapid access to defibrillation. Further efforts are needed to promote early recognition and a rapid bystander response to exercise-related SCA.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".