MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400923561 · doi:10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100715

Interventions to optimize dispatcher-assisted CPR instructions: A scoping review

2024· review· en· W4400923561 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueResuscitation Plus · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of OttawaNorth York General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Heart Foundation of Australia
KeywordsPsychological interventionCardiopulmonary resuscitationComputer sciencePsychologyMedical emergencyMedicineEmergency medicineNursingResuscitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To review and summarize existing literature and knowledge gaps regarding interventions that have been tested to optimize dispatcher-assisted CPR (DA-CPR) instruction protocols for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). This scoping review was undertaken by an International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) Basic Life Support scoping review team and guided by the ILCOR methodological framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were published in peer-reviewed journals and evaluated interventions used to improve DA-CPR. The search was carried out in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) Reviews, and the Campbell Library from 2000 to December 18, 2023. After full text review, 31 studies were included in the final review. The interventions reviewed were use of video at the scene ( n = 9), changes in terminology about compressions ( n = 6), implementation of novel DA-CPR protocols ( n = 4), advanced dispatcher training ( n = 3), centralization of the dispatch center ( n = 2), use of metronome or varied metronome rates ( n = 2), change in CPR sequence and compression ratio ( n = 1), animated audio-visual recording ( n = 1), pre-recorded instructions vs. conversational live instructions ( n = 1), inclusion of “undress patient” instructions ( n = 1), and specific verbal encouragement ( n = 1). Studies ranged in methodology from registry studies to randomized clinical trials with the majority being observational studies of simulated EMS calls for OHCA. Outcomes were highly variable but included rates of bystander CPR, confidence & willingness to perform CPR, time to initiation of bystander CPR, bystander CPR quality (including CPR metrics: chest compression depth and rate; chest compression fraction; full chest recoil, ventilation rate, overall CPR competency), rates of automated external defibrillator (AED) use, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival. Overall, all interventions seem to be associated with potential improvement in bystander CPR and CPR metrics. There appears to be trends towards improvement on key outcomes however more research is needed. This scoping review highlights the lack of high-quality clinical research on any of the tested interventions to improve DA-CPR. There is insufficient evidence to explore the effectiveness of any of these interventions via systematic review.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.376
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.343 · 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