MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408198247 · doi:10.1097/mcc.0000000000001246

The dynamic pathophysiology of post cardiac arrest brain injury: “time is brain”

2025· review· en· W4408198247 on OpenAlexaff
C. Allen, Jordan D. Bird, Mypinder S. Sekhon

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Critical Care · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePathophysiologyTraumatic brain injuryNeuroscienceIntensive care medicineCardiologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the time dependent nature of post-cardiac arrest brain injury (PCABI) while contextualizing clinical trial evidence. RECENT FINDINGS: PCABI represents a dynamic entity with respect to its pathophysiology. Intuitively, PCABI pathophysiology has been characterized focusing on mechanisms associated with cerebral ischemia. Interventions that augment cerebral oxygen delivery, such as increasing mean arterial pressure, have garnered interest. Regrettably, these trials have not demonstrated improved outcomes. At the core of this conundrum is the time dependent nature of PCABI pathophysiology with trials employing interventions approximately 4-6 h after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). This therapeutic window is likely far past the efficacy period of resumption of oxygen delivery to the ischemic brain. Thus, we suggest compartmentalizing PCABI into four phases: circulatory arrest; intra-arrest physiology; immediate reperfusion; and delayed reperfusion. Culprit mechanisms are discussed for each phase with contextualization of recent trial results. SUMMARY: PCABI has dynamic pathophysiology and restoration of cerebral oxygen delivery in a delayed manner from ROSC has diminished efficacy. PCABI pathophysiology must be viewed in a time dependent manner and interventions aimed at restoring cerebral oxygen delivery are likely only to be efficacious if applied immediately after ROSC.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.400 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Critical CareSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207