MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of basic life support interventions for foreign body airway obstructions: A population-based cohort study

2024· article· en· W4399207710 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueResuscitation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicForeign Body Medical Cases
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Association of Emergency PhysiciansAlberta Health Services
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionBasic life supportAirwayCohortPopulationForeign bodyCohort studyAirway obstructionIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineResuscitationSurgeryInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To quantify the associations of foreign body airway obstruction (FBAO) basic life support (BLS) interventions with FBAO relief and survival to discharge. METHODS: We identified prehospital FBAO patient encounters in Alberta, Canada between Jan 1, 2018 and Dec 31,2021 using the provincial emergency medical services' medical records, deterministically linked to hospital data. Two physicians reviewed encounters to determine cases and extract data. Multivariable logistic regression determined the adjusted odds ratio of FBAO relief (primary outcome) and survival to discharge for the exposure of BLS interventions (abdominal thrusts [AT], chest compressions/thrusts [CC], or combinations) relative to back blows [BB]. Intervention-associated injuries were identified using International Classification of Diseases codes, followed by health records review. RESULTS: We identified 3,677 patient encounters, including 709 FBAOs requiring intervention. Bystanders performed the initial BLS intervention in 488 cases (77.4%). Bystanders and paramedics did not relieve the FBAO in 151 (23.5%) and 11 (16.7%) cases, respectively. FBAOs not relieved before paramedic arrival had a higher proportion of deaths (n = 4[0.4%] versus n = 92[42.4%], p < 0.001). AT and CC were associated with decreased odds of FBAO relief relative to BB (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.49 [95%CI 0.30-0.80] and 0.14 [95%CI 0.07-0.28], respectively). CC were associated with decreased odds of survival to discharge (aOR 0.04 [95%CI 0.01-0.32]). AT, CC, and BB were implicated in intervention-associated injuries in four, nine, and zero cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Back blows are associated with improved outcomes compared to abdominal thrusts and chest compressions. These data can inform prospective studies aimed at improving response to choking emergencies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.316 · 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