ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2020
A proposal for selective resuscitation of adult cardiac arrest patients in a pandemic.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Admission Code Status and End-of-life Care for Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2022Article
- State emergency medical services guidance and protocol changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A national investigation.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2022Article
- A proposal for selective resuscitation of adult cardiac arrest patients in a pandemic.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Allocation of limited resources in pandemics begs for ethical guidance. The issue of ventilator allocation in pandemics has been reviewed by many medical ethicists, but as localities activate crisis standards of care, and health care workers are infected from patient exposure, the decision to pursue cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) must also be examined to better balance the increased risks to healthcare personnel with the very low resuscitation rates of patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A crisis standard of care that is equitable, transparent, and mindful of both human and physical resources will lessen the impact on society in this era of COVID-19. This paper builds on previous work of ventilator allocation in pandemic crises to propose a literature-based, justice-informed ethical framework for selecting treatment options for CPR. The pandemic affects regions differently over time, so these suggested guidelines may require adaptation to local practice variations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.