MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417179078 · doi:10.18192/uojm.v15i2.7335

Evaluating the Effect of a Pre-Arrival CPR Checklist on Resuscitation Quality During a Simulated Cardiac Arrest

2025· article· en· W4417179078 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Doran Drew, Michael O’Brien, Warren J. Cheung, Lindsey McMurray, Ashley Krown, Marie‐Joe Nemnom, Christian Sandrock

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChecklistResuscitationCardiopulmonary resuscitationIntervention (counseling)Ventilation (architecture)Randomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: While high-quality CPR is a cornerstone of cardiac arrest management, studies show variability in adherence to resuscitation guidelines. We sought to evaluate the effect of a CPR checklist on adherence to resuscitation guidelines during a simulated cardiac arrest scenario. Methods: We conducted a double-blind randomized controlled trial involving Canadian emergency medicine residents. The intervention group was presented with a CPR checklist during the pre-brief and scenario, whereas the control group was not. The simulation scenario consisted of an adult patient arresting shortly after arrival to the emergency department, following which actor-provided ventilations and chest compressions deteriorated in a standardized fashion. We measured correction of deteriorating CPR quality and report the proportion of time during which high-quality CPR elements were provided. Results: Thirty-five of 53 residents completed the study before COVID-19 closure. No difference in total arrest time with no or low-quality chest compressions was observed in the intervention group [median = 0.29 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.29-0.38)] vs. control [median = 0.42 (IQR 0.31-0.49)] p = 0.07. A significantly lower proportion of poor-quality chest compressions was observed in the intervention group [median = 0.24 (IQR 0.20-0.38)] vs. control [median = 0.42 (IQR 0.33-0.61)] p = 0.03. Furthermore, a significantly lower proportion of time with unacceptably high bag-mask ventilation rates were observed in the intervention group [median = 0.81 (IQR 0.61-1.00)] vs. control [median = 1.00 (IQR 1.00-1.00)] p = 0.02. Conclusions: Our CPR checklist improved adherence to resuscitation guidelines amongst resident physicians in a simulated scenario. ---------- Introduction : Bien qu’une RCP de haute qualité soit la pierre angulaire de la prise en charge de l’arrêt cardiaque, des études montrent que l’adhérence des directives de réanimation varie. Nous avons cherché à évaluer l’effet d’une liste de contrôle pour la RCP sur l’adhérence des directives de réanimation lors d’un scénario simulé d’arrêt cardiaque. Méthodes : Nous avons mené un essai contrôlé randomisé en double aveugle auprès de résidents en médecine d’urgence canadiens. Le groupe d’intervention a été présenté avec une liste de contrôle pour la RCP lors de la séance d’information préalable et du scénario, contrairement au groupe témoin. Le scénario de simulation consistait en l’arrêt cardiaque d’un patient adulte peu après son arrivée aux urgences, à la suite duquel les ventilations et les compressions thoraciques effectuées par un acteur se détérioraient de manière standardisée. Nous avons mesuré la correction de la détérioration de la qualité de la RCP et rapporté la proportion de temps pendant laquelle des éléments de RCP de haute qualité ont été fournis. Résultats : Trente-cinq des 53 résidents ont terminé l’étude avant la fermeture due à la COVID-19. Aucune différence dans la durée totale de l’arrêt cardiaque sans compressions thoraciques ou avec des compressions thoraciques de mauvaise qualité n’a été observée entre le groupe d’intervention [médiane = 0,29 (intervalle interquartile (IQR) 0,23-0,36)] et le groupe témoin [médiane = 0,42 (IQR 0,31-0,49)] (p = 0,07). Une proportion significativement plus faible de compressions thoraciques de mauvaise qualité a été observée dans le groupe d’intervention [médiane = 0,24 (IQR 0,20-0,38)] par rapport au groupe témoin [médiane = 0,42 (IQR 0,33-0,61)] p = 0,03. En outre, une proportion significativement plus faible de temps avec des taux de ventilation au masque et au ballon inacceptablement élevés a été observée dans le groupe d’intervention [médiane = 0,81 (IQR 0,61-1,00)] par rapport au groupe témoin [médiane = 1,00 (IQR 1,00-1,00)] p = 0,02. Conclusions : Notre liste de contrôle pour la RCP a amélioré l’adhérence des directives de réanimation par les médecins résidents dans un scénario simulé.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of MedicineSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207