MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390988589 · doi:10.1016/j.auec.2023.12.001

Informing Utstein-style reporting guidelines for prehospital thrombolysis: A scoping review

2024· review· en· W4390988589 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Louis S. Jenkins, Tania Johnston, Richard Armour, Sonja Maria

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Emergency Care · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCINAHLEmergency medical servicesMedical emergencyData extractionPrehospital Emergency CareThrombolysisMEDLINEEmergency medicinePsychological interventionMyocardial infarctionNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Rural Australians with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) face higher mortality rates due to limited access to specialised cardiac services. Paramedic-administered prehospital thrombolysis (PHT) has emerged as an alternative to primary percutaneous intervention (pPCI) for patients facing barriers or delays to cardiac care. There is variability in PHT practices among Australian ambulance services, lacking standardised definitions and outcome measures. The aim of this scoping review was to identify quality indicators and influencing factors associated with outcomes for patients receiving PHT. METHODS: A systematic search of literature in SCOPUS and Academic Search Complete, CINAHL and Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition databases via EBSCO (Health) was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. Peer-reviewed studies from the past decade were screened using search criteria relevant to prehospital thrombolysis and quality indicators. Data extraction was performed and themed using five domains from the Utstein-style template commonly known for standardised prehospital cardiac arrest reporting. RESULTS: After removing duplicates, the search yielded 3596 articles with 28 empirical studies meeting inclusion criteria for the review. These were primarily retrospective cohort studies performed in Australia, Canada and the United States. The scoping review identified 24 clinical quality indicators and factors related to Emergency Medical Service (EMS) systems, AMI recognition and ambulance dispatch, patient variables, PHT processes and patient outcomes. These findings correlate to the Donabedian structure-process-outcome quality of care model and have utility to inform future PHT reporting guidelines for jurisdictional ambulance services. CONCLUSIONS: Given the variability in prehospital practice across Australian ambulance services, standardised reporting on quality indicators for PHT is needed. The Utstein-style template used to report data on pre-hospital cardiac arrest, trauma and airway management could be used for quality improvement in PHT. This review presents 24 quality indicators representing system, recognition and response, patient, process, and outcomes related to PHT. These results could be used to inform a future Delphi study and Utstein-like reporting guideline for prehospital thrombolysis.

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)0.374
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.611
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3740.611
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.016
Bibliometrics0.0530.049
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0180.018
Open science0.0130.017
Research integrity0.0110.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.340 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
DomainReporting
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralasian Emergency CareSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207