MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399325400 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000006334

Epinephrine Dosing Intervals Are Associated With Pediatric In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Outcomes: A Multicenter Study*

2024· article· en· W4399325400 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Martha Kienzle, Ryan W. Morgan, Ron Reeder, Tageldin Ahmed, Robert A. Berg, Robert Bishop, Matthew Bochkoris, Joseph A. Carcillo, Todd C. Carpenter, Kellimarie Cooper, J. Wesley Diddle, Myke Federman, Richard Fernandez, Deborah Franzon, Aisha H. Frazier, Stuart H. Friess, Meg Frizzola, Kathryn Graham, Mark W. Hall, Christopher M. Horvat, Leanna L. Huard, Tensing Maa, Arushi Manga, Patrick S. McQuillen, Kathleen L. Meert, Peter M. Mourani, Vinay Nadkarni, Maryam Y. Naim, Murray M. Pollack, Anil Sapru, Carleen Schneiter, Matthew Sharron, Sarah Tabbutt, Shirley Viteri, Heather Wolfe, Robert M. Sutton

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentU.S. Department of DefenseAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityNational Institutes of HealthChildren's Hospital of PhiladelphiaSwedish Orphan BiovitrumLaerdal Foundation for Acute MedicineNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentZOLL Medical CorporationNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteMallinckrodt PharmaceuticalsNational Institute of General Medical SciencesAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsMedicineDosingInterquartile rangeCardiopulmonary resuscitationEpinephrineExtracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitationAnesthesiaIntensive careResuscitationEmergency medicineInternal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Data to support epinephrine dosing intervals during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) are conflicting. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between epinephrine dosing intervals and outcomes. We hypothesized that dosing intervals less than 3 minutes would be associated with improved neurologic survival compared with greater than or equal to 3 minutes. DESIGN: This study is a secondary analysis of The ICU-RESUScitation Project (NCT028374497), a multicenter trial of a quality improvement bundle of physiology-directed CPR training and post-cardiac arrest debriefing. SETTING: Eighteen PICUs and pediatric cardiac ICUs in the United States. PATIENTS: Subjects were 18 years young or younger and 37 weeks old or older corrected gestational age who had an index cardiac arrest. Patients who received less than two doses of epinephrine, received extracorporeal CPR, or had dosing intervals greater than 8 minutes were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: The primary exposure was an epinephrine dosing interval of less than 3 vs. greater than or equal to 3 minutes. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was survival to discharge with a favorable neurologic outcome defined as a Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category score of 1-2 or no change from baseline. Regression models evaluated the association between dosing intervals and: 1) survival outcomes and 2) CPR duration. Among 382 patients meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria, median age was 0.9 years (interquartile range 0.3-7.6 yr) and 45% were female. After adjustment for confounders, dosing intervals less than 3 minutes were not associated with survival with favorable neurologic outcome (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.10; 95% CI, 0.84-1.46; p = 0.48) but were associated with improved sustained return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) (aRR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.07-1.37; p < 0.01) and shorter CPR duration (adjusted effect estimate, -9.5 min; 95% CI, -14.4 to -4.84 min; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving at least two doses of epinephrine, dosing intervals less than 3 minutes were not associated with neurologic outcome but were associated with sustained ROSC and shorter CPR duration.

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: fund_new · design weight: 1678.90 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Secondary analysis of trial data on epinephrine dosing intervals and pediatric cardiac arrest outcomes; a clinical question.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

It evaluates epinephrine dosing intervals and cardiac-arrest outcomes, not research practice.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Pediatric cardiac-arrest outcomes vs epinephrine dosing intervals; clinical resuscitation research.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.312 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207