Feasibility of a 4 French resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) device for nontraumatic cardiac arrest in a randomized controlled study using a large porcine model
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: The objectives of this study were to assess the return of spontaneous circulation rates and hemodynamic response of large swine (>65Kg) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation after nontraumatic cardiac arrest using the COBRA-OS® aortic occlusion balloon and to address limitations of large swine closed-chest cardiopulmonary resuscitation by comparing closed-chest vs. open-chest cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Methods: test for normal and non-parametric data, respectively, while categorical data was compared with the chi square test. Results: < 0.05). The COBRA-OS® successfully occluded all aortas and animals experienced higher mean arterial pressures in both groups with aortic occlusion (median 15 mm Hg, IQR 13-23 mm Hg), but with a higher MAP difference in the open cardiac massage group (-12.2 mm Hg, [-2.581, -21.819]). Conclusions: Consideration should be given to intra-thoracic cardiac massage to increase cardiopulmonary resuscitation effectiveness and therefore return of spontaneous circulation rates in large (>65 kg) swine models of nontraumatic cardiac arrest. The COBRA-OS® demonstrated feasibility for use in this model.The Keenan Research Center, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital Animal Care Committee: ACC Protocol #726.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it