MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313545003 · doi:10.1186/s40001-022-00955-x

Survival outcome among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4313545003 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guozhong Zhou, Yan Wang, Zihong Sun, Mingqi Yuan, Yunlin Ma, Qianxi Wu, Chunyan Wu, Jing Xu, Yongyi Li, Yunchuan Liu, Zhenzhou Wang, Chao Song

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean journal of medical research · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReturn of spontaneous circulationCardiopulmonary resuscitationMeta-analysisConfidence intervalOdds ratioCochrane LibrarySurvival rateInternal medicineMortality rateEmergency medicineResuscitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background This study aimed to assess the survival outcomes among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (CA) who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in China. Methods Relevant studies, published between January 1, 2010 and September 5, 2022, were retrieved from databases, including EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, the China Biology Medicine disk, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases. We included clinical studies in which all patients were diagnosed with CA and underwent out-of-hospital CPR, and the outcome variables were at least one of the following: return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to admission, survival to hospital discharge, 1-month survival, achieved good neurological outcomes, and 1-year survival. Two investigators independently extracted the study data and assessed its quality using a modified Newcastle–Ottawa Scale tool. The data were pooled using random-effects models. Results Of the 3620 identified studies, 49 (63,378 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled ROSC rate was 9.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.5–10.5%, I 2 = 97%), the pooled survival to admission rate was 5.0% (95% CI 2.7–8.0%, I 2 = 98%), and the pooled survival to discharge rate was 1.8% (95% CI 1.2–2.5%, I 2 = 95%). Additionally, the ROSC rate of patients with bystander CPR was significantly higher than that of those without bystander CPR, and the pooled odds ratio (OR) was 7.92 (95% CI 4.32–14.53, I 2 = 85%). The ROSC rate of participants who started CPR within 5 min was significantly higher than that of those who started CPR after 5 min, and the pooled OR was 5.92 (95% CI 1.92–18.26, I 2 = 85%). The ROSC rate of participants with defibrillation was significantly higher than that of those without defibrillation, and the pooled OR was 8.52 (95% CI 3.72–19.52, I 2 = 77%). Conclusion The survival outcomes of out-of-hospital CPR in China are far below the world average. Therefore, the policy of providing automated external defibrillators (AEDs) in public places and strengthening CPR training for healthcare providers and public personnel should be encouraged and disseminated nationwide. Trial registration This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022326165) on 29 April 2022.

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 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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.291 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean journal of medical researchSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207