ReviewResuscitation plus2024
Extracting physiologic and clinical data from defibrillators for research purposes to improve treatment for patients in cardiac arrest.
Review in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vitabel: A Python Framework for Visualizing and Labelling High-Resolution Physiological Data for Critical Care Machine Learning.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- ECG characteristics as indicators of the aetiology of pulseless electrical activity: a systematic review.British paramedic journal · 2025Article
- Re-arrest immediately after return of spontaneous circulation: A retrospective observational study of in-hospital cardiac arrest.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2025Observational
- Do different mechanical compressors provide equivalent hemodynamic support during cardiopulmonary resuscitation?Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A defibrillator should be connected to all patients receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to allow early defibrillation. The defibrillator will collect signal data such as the electrocardiogram (ECG), thoracic impedance and end-tidal CO Methods: The successful collection of defibrillator files has several challenges. There is no scientific standard on how to store such data, which have resulted in several proprietary industrial solutions. The data needs to be exported to a software environment where signal filtering and classifications of ECG rhythms can be performed. This may be automated using different algorithms and artificial intelligence (AI). The patient can be classified being in ventricular fibrillation or -tachycardia, asystole, pulseless electrical activity or having obtained return of spontaneous circulation. How this dynamic response is time-dependent and related to covariates can be handled in several ways. These include Aalen's linear model, Weibull regression and joint models. Conclusions: The vast amount of signal data from defibrillator represents promising opportunities for the use of AI and statistical analysis to assess patient response to CPR. This may provide an epidemiologic basis to improve resuscitation guidelines and give more individualized care. We suggest that an international working party is initiated to facilitate a discussion on how open formats for defibrillator data can be accomplished, that obligates industrial partners to further develop their current technological solutions.
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.