Guidance for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation of Children With Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims to provide guidance to health care workers for the provision of basic and advanced life support to children and neonates with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It aligns with the 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular care while providing strategies for reducing risk of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 to health care providers. Patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and cardiac arrest should receive chest compressions and defibrillation, when indicated, as soon as possible. Because of the importance of ventilation during pediatric and neonatal resuscitation, oxygenation and ventilation should be prioritized. All CPR events should therefore be considered aerosol-generating procedures. Thus, personal protective equipment (PPE) appropriate for aerosol-generating procedures (including N95 respirators or an equivalent) should be donned before resuscitation, and high-efficiency particulate air filters should be used. Any personnel without appropriate PPE should be immediately excused by providers wearing appropriate PPE. Neonatal resuscitation guidance is unchanged from standard algorithms, except for specific attention to infection prevention and control. In summary, health care personnel should continue to reduce the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission through vaccination and use of appropriate PPE during pediatric resuscitations. Health care organizations should ensure the availability and appropriate use of PPE. Because delays or withheld CPR increases the risk to patients for poor clinical outcomes, children and neonates with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 should receive prompt, high-quality CPR in accordance with evidence-based guidelines.
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 | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.010 |
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".