ArticleReviews in cardiovascular medicine2024
Identifying Subgroups with Differential Responses to Amiodarone among Cardiac Arrest Patients with a Shockable Rhythm at Hospital Arrival using the Machine Learning Approach.
Article in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There are few reports of studies on the differential effects of amiodarone among out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients with a shockable rhythm at hospital arrival. The present study aimed to investigate the clinical heterogeneity of OHCA patients with a shockable rhythm upon hospital arrival and to identify subgroups with differential responses to amiodarone, using a machine learning approach. Methods: We used the Japanese nationwide OHCA registry of the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine for this study; data from OHCA patients with a shockable rhythm at hospital arrival were included in the analyses. The primary outcome was a favorable neurological outcome at 30 days. We developed a scoring system by the weighting method with logistic likelihood loss to identify patient subgroups showing differential effects of amiodarone from the point of view of the neurological outcome and survival at 30 days. Results: Among the 68,111 cases of OHCA in the registry, the data of 2333 OHCA patients with an initial shockable rhythm at hospital arrival were analyzed. The developed score identified higher age, longer interval between the call to the emergency medical service and hospital arrival, absence of a "witness", no defibrillation prior to hospital arrival, hypothermia at hospital arrival, and pre-hospital epinephrine administration as variables that were significantly associated with a beneficial effect of amiodarone. Based on the results of the developed scoring system, 47% (1107/2333) of the patients were considered to greatly benefit from amiodarone administration, whereas 53% (1226/2333) of patients were considered to not benefit from amiodarone administration. The effect of amiodarone on the neurological outcome at 30 days varied significantly among the subgroups identified by the developed score ( Conclusions: We successfully developed a model that could discriminate between OHCA patients with an initial shockable rhythm at hospital arrival who would benefit or not benefit from the administration of amiodarone in terms of the neurological outcome at 30 days. There was clinical heterogeneity among OHCA patients with a shockable rhythm in terms of their response to amiodarone.
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.