Recovery Potential in Patients After Cardiac Arrest Who Die After Limitations or Withdrawal of Life Support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Understanding the relationship between patients' clinical characteristics and outcomes is fundamental to medicine. When critically ill patients die after withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST), the inability to observe the potential for recovery with continued aggressive care could bias future clinical decisions and research. Objective: To quantify the frequency with which experts consider patients who died after WLST following resuscitated cardiac arrest to have had recovery potential if life-sustaining therapy had been continued. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study included comatose adult patients (aged ≥18 years) treated following resuscitation from cardiac arrest at a single academic medical center between January 1, 2010, and July 31, 2022. Patients with advanced directives limiting critical care or who experienced cardiac arrest of traumatic or neurologic etiology were excluded. An international cohort of experts in post-arrest care based on clinical experience and academic productivity was identified. Experts reviewed the cases between August 24, 2022, and February 11, 2024. Exposure: Patients who died after WLST. Main Outcome and Measures: Three or more experts independently estimated recovery potential for each patient had life-sustaining treatment been continued, using a 7-point numerical ordinal scale. In the primary analysis, which involved the patient cases with death after WLST, a 1% or greater estimated recovery potential was considered to be clinically meaningful. In secondary analyses, thresholds of 5% and 10% estimated recovery probability were explored. Results: A total of 2391 patients (median [IQR] age, 59 [48-69] years; 1455 men [60.9%]) were included, of whom 714 (29.9%) survived to discharge. Cases of uncertain outcome (1431 patients [59.8%]) in which WLST preceded death were reviewed by 38 experts who rendered 4381 estimates of recovery potential. In 518 cases (36.2%; 95% CI, 33.7%-38.7%), all experts believed that recovery potential was less than 1% if life-sustaining therapies had been continued. In the remaining 913 cases (63.8%; 95% CI, 61.3%-66.3%), at least 1 expert believed that recovery potential was at least 1%. In 227 cases (15.9%; 95% CI, 14.0%-17.9%), all experts agreed that recovery potential was at least 1%, and in 686 cases (47.9%; 95% CI, 45.3%-50.6%), expert estimates differed at this threshold. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of comatose patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest, most who died after WLST were considered by experts to have had recovery potential. These findings suggest that novel solutions to avoiding deaths based on biased prognostication or incomplete information are needed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".