Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35602465›Full record

ReviewResuscitation plus2022

Effectiveness of alternative shock strategies for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review.

Helen Pocock, Charles D Deakin, Ranjit Lall, Christopher M Smith, Gavin D Perkins

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Resuscitation plus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Helen PocockWarwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom.
Charles D DeakinSouth Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, Southern House, Sparrowgrove, Otterbourne, Winchester SO21 2RU, United Kingdom.
Ranjit LallWarwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom.
Christopher M SmithWarwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom.
Gavin D PerkinsWarwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: To determine the optimal first-shock energy level for biphasic defibrillation and whether fixed or escalating protocols for subsequent shocks are most effective. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, the Web of Science and national and international trial registry databases for papers published from database inception to January 2022. We reviewed reference lists of key papers to identify additional references. The population included adults sustaining non traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest subject to attempted defibrillation. Studies of internal or monophasic defibrillation and studies other than randomised controlled trials or prospective cohorts were excluded. Two reviewers assessed study relevance. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment, using the ROBINS-I tool, were conducted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Data underwent intention-to-treat analysis. Results: We identified no studies evaluating first shock energy. Only one study ( Conclusion: This systematic review did not identify an optimal first-shock energy for biphasic defibrillation. We identified no survival advantage at 30 days when comparing 360 J fixed with 200 J escalating strategy.

Indexed as

Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationDefibrillationElectric CountershockOut-of-Hospital Cardiac ArrestVentricular Fibrillation

Identifiers

PMID35602465
PMCPMC9114679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.