Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29960986›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2018

Delphi Analysis of Science Gaps in the 2015 American Heart Association Cardiac Arrest Guidelines.

Ashish R Panchal, Rebecca E Cash, Remle P Crowe, Ryan Coute, David Way, Tom Aufderheide, Raina M Merchant

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Evaluating the current breadth of randomized control trials on cardiac arrest: A scoping review.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Emergency medical services education research priorities during COVID-19: A modified Delphi study.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Ashish R PanchalOhio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH ashish.panchal@osumc.edu.
Rebecca E CashNational Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians (NREMT), Columbus, OH.
Remle P CroweNational Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians (NREMT), Columbus, OH.
Ryan CouteKansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences, Kansas City, MO.
David WayOhio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.
Tom AufderheideMedical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI.
Raina M MerchantUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians · USKansas City University · USMedical College of Wisconsin · USThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent cardiac arrest guidelines have limited high-quality scientific evidence to support recommendations for care. The quality of scientific evidence on which guidelines are based may correlate with improved patient outcomes and meaningful survival. We sought to develop a prioritized list of knowledge gaps in resuscitation to assist researchers, policy makers, and funding agencies in their decision-making process. METHODS AND

resultsA 4-stage modified Delphi method was used with a panel of cardiac arrest experts. Experts addressed the prompt: "What are the top 3 gaps in knowledge involving cardiac arrest care that should be research priorities for National Institutes of Health/American Heart Association funding to have the greatest impact on public health?" Knowledge gaps were identified in the initial round, rated in a second round, and rank ordered in the third round, and they underwent final review and consensus (final round). The outcome was 10 knowledge gaps, with prioritization of the top 3 gaps. A total of 61 gaps, with 19 distinct themes, were identified by participants. The 10 knowledge gaps most likely to affect public health identified by the expert panel included, in order, the following: telecommunicator cardiopulmonary resuscitation, hemodynamic monitoring for goal-directed resuscitation, reasons why bystanders fail to respond, optimization of postarrest care, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest identification and response, individualizing resuscitation strategies, predicting patients at risk, tools for neuroprognostication, optimal airway management, and optimizing educational strategies.

conclusionsTen priorities for cardiac arrest research were identified, but consensus was not reached on the prioritized top 3. Future research should address these gaps to potentially improve resuscitation guideline evidence quality.

Indexed as

American Heart AssociationProfessional Practice GapsCardiologyConsensusDelphi TechniqueEvidence-Based MedicineHeart ArrestHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'Treatment OutcomeUnited Statescardiac arrestconsensusDelphiknowledge gapresuscitationscience gap

Identifiers

PMID29960986
PMCPMC6064902
OpenAlexW2810902884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.