Regarding manuscript: "resuscitation outcomes consortium-amiodarone, lidocaine, or placebo study: rationale and methodology behind out-of-hospital cardiac arrest antiarrhythmic drug trial".

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium-Amiodarone, Lidocaine or Placebo Study (ROC-ALPS): Rationale and methodology behind an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest antiarrhythmic drug trial.2014
• Comment on
  Letter to the editor regarding manuscript "resuscitation outcomes consortium-amiodarone, lidocaine or placebo: rationale and methodology behind out-of-hospital cardiac arrest antiarrhythmic drug trial".2014

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as