Amiodarone dose in patients with shockable out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Amiodarone is used in shockable out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), but the ideal dose is unknown. METHODS: This was an analysis from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Cardiac Epidemiologic Registry (2011-2015). Patients with shockable OHCA who received 5 or more defibrillation attempts and treatment with 300 or 450 mg of amiodarone were included. Outcomes were ROSC at ED arrival, survival at hospital discharge, and favorable neurologic function at discharge. Group-differences were adjusted for using inverse probability weighting and a multiple logistic regression model. RESULTS: The present study included 910 patients; 426 received amiodarone 300 mg and 484 received amiodarone 450 mg. The amiodarone 300 mg group had a higher estimated probability of ROSC at ED arrival as compared with the amiodarone 450 mg group (30.8% [95% CI, 26.6-35.1] vs 24.2% [95% CI, 20.5-27.9], respectively; adjusted probability difference, 6.6% (0.9-12.3), p = 0.0234). The group differences in survival at hospital discharge (21.3% [95% CI, 17.2-25.4] vs 18.0% [95% CI, 14.6-21.5]; adjusted probability difference, 3.3% [-2.3-8.8]) and favorable neurologic outcome at discharge (16.5% [95% CI, 12.9-20.2] vs 12.7% [95% CI, 9.5-16.0]; adjusted probability difference, 3.8% [95% CI, -1.2-8.7]) did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: In patients with shockable OHCA who received 5 or more defibrillation attempts, a dose of amiodarone 300 mg was associated with a similar survival compared with a total dose of amiodarone 450 mg. Further study is needed to evaluate the need for a second administration of amiodarone in patients with shockable OHCA.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".