MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404262095 · doi:10.2196/58780

Bystander Response and Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Outcomes (Bro. Study) in 3 Gulf Countries: Protocol for a Prospective, Observational, International Collaboration Study

2024· article· en· W4404262095 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Munawar Farooq, Mahmood Al Jufaili, Faisal K Hanjra, Shabbir Ahmad, Emad Hanna Dababneh, Omar Farooq Al-Nahhas, Khalid Bashir

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUnited Arab Emirates University
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyChain of survivalPsychological interventionEmergency medicineBystander effectCardiopulmonary resuscitationContext (archaeology)Return of spontaneous circulationAutomated external defibrillatorMedical emergencyEmergency medical servicesBasic life supportResuscitationInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: : Globally, there is significant variation in the out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survival rate. Early links in the chain of survival, including bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and the use of an automated external defibrillator at the scene, are known to be of crucial importance, with strong evidence of increased survival rate with good neurological outcomes. The data from the Middle East are limited and report variable rates of bystander CPR and survival. It is crucial to get prospective, reliable data on bystander response in these regions to help plan interventions to improve bystander response and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This international collaborative study aims to describe the characteristics, including bystander interventions and outcomes, of OHCAs brought to hospitals enrolled in the study from Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates; Doha, Qatar; and Muscat, Oman. It also aims to describe the strength of the association between bystander response and OHCA outcomes, including the return of spontaneous circulation, survival to hospital admission, survival to discharge, and good neurological outcome at discharge in the local context of low bystander CPR rates. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, noninterventional observational study (Bro. Study) will be conducted at the emergency departments of 4 participating tertiary care hospitals in 3 countries. The data will be collected prospectively according to the Utstein style (a set of internationally accepted guidelines for uniform reporting of cardiac arrests) on demographic variables (age, sex, nationality, country, participating center, and comorbidities), peri-cardiac arrest variables (location, witnessed or not, bystander CPR, use of automated external defibrillator, time of emergency medical services arrival, initial rhythm, number of shocks, and time of prehospital CPR), and outcome variables (return of spontaneous circulation, survival to discharge, and neurological outcome at discharge and 3 months). Univariate and multivariate analysis with logistic regression models will be used to measure the strength of the association of bystander interventions with outcomes using SPSS (version 22). RESULTS: Data collection began in November 2023 and will continue for 2 years, with publication expected by early 2026. CONCLUSIONS: Bystander response to an OHCA is critical to a favorable outcome. The reliable, baseline bystander CPR data will be a cornerstone in the team's next planned projects, which are to qualitatively identify the barriers to bystander CPR, conduct a scoping review of community interventions in the Gulf and other Asian countries, and design and implement strategies to help improve the bystander CPR rate in the community. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/58780.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.376 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→