MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7079634243 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17025045

PREHOSPITAL AIRWAY MANAGEMENT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF TECHNIQUES AND OUTCOMES

2025· article· en· W7079634243 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirwayAirway managementObservational studyRandomized controlled trialSupraglottic airwayMeta-analysisIntubationSystematic reviewVentilation (architecture)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to synthesize the current evidence on the efficacy, safety, and patient outcomes associated with different prehospital airway management techniques, including bag-valve-mask (BVM) ventilation, endotracheal intubation (ETI), and supraglottic airways (SGAs). Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus was conducted for randomized controlled trials and observational studies from inception to the present. Studies comparing advanced airway management (ETI or SGA) to BVM or to each other in prehospital patients were included. Primary outcomes were survival to hospital discharge and survival with a favourable neurological outcome. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: Twenty-three studies with a total of over 1.2 million patients were included. Meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in survival to hospital discharge between advanced airways (ETI or SGA) and BVM ventilation (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.27). However, the use of advanced airways was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the likelihood of a favourable neurological outcome compared to BVM (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.95). SGAs demonstrated a higher first-pass success rate (92%) and shorter placement time than ETI (78%). Conclusion: In patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, advanced airway management (ETI or SGA) is associated with worse neurological outcomes compared to BVM ventilation, despite no difference in survival. The findings advocate for a paradigm shift towards optimizing BVM ventilation as a first-line strategy. When an advanced airway is necessary, SGAs may be a more practical option than ETI due to higher success rates and faster placement. Keywords: Prehospital Emergency Care, Airway Management, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest, Emergency Medical Services.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.026
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→