ArticleNeurology2022
Bayesian Outcome Prediction After Resuscitation From Cardiac Arrest.
Article in Neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Bayesian reevaluation of randomized controlled trials in assisted reproductive technology: quantifying evidence strength for null and alternative hypotheses.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- How much information is needed to predict outcomes after cardiac arrest?Resuscitation · 2025Article
- Estimating bias from withdrawal of life sustaining treatment in clinical trials.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
- Comparing strategies for prehospital transport to specialty care after cardiac arrest.Resuscitation · 2023Article
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
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesPostarrest prognostication research does not typically account for the sequential nature of real-life data acquisition and interpretation and reports nonintuitive estimates of uncertainty. Bayesian approaches offer advantages well suited to prognostication. We used Bayesian regression to explore the usefulness of sequential prognostic indicators in the context of prior knowledge and compared this with a guideline-concordant algorithm.
methodsWe included patients hospitalized at a single center after cardiac arrest. We extracted prospective data and assumed these data accrued over time as in routine practice. We considered predictors demographic and arrest characteristics, initial and daily neurologic examination, laboratory results, therapeutic interventions, brain imaging, and EEG. We fit Bayesian hierarchical generalized linear multivariate models predicting discharge Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 4 or 5 (poor outcomes) vs 1-3 including sequential clinical and prognostic data. We explored outcome posterior probability distributions (PPDs) for individual patients and overall. As a comparator, we applied the 2021 European Resuscitation Council and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ERC/ESICM) guidelines.
resultsWe included 2,692 patients of whom 864 (35%) were discharged with a CPC 1-3. Patients' outcome PPDs became narrow and shifted toward 0 or 1 as sequentially acquired information was added to models. These changes were largest after arrest characteristics and initial neurologic examination were included. Using information typically available at or before intensive care unit admission, sensitivity predicting poor outcome was 51% with a 0.6% false-positive rate. In our most comprehensive model, sensitivity for poor outcome prediction was 76% with 0.6% false-positive rate (FPR). The ERC/ESICM algorithm applied to 547 of 2,692 patients and yielded 36% sensitivity with 0% FPR. DISCUSSION: Bayesian models offer advantages well suited to prognostication research. On balance, our findings support the view that in expert hands, accurate neurologic prognostication is possible in many cases before 72 hours postarrest. Although we caution against early withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies, rapid outcome prediction can inform clinical decision making and future clinical trials.
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.