ArticleOpen heart2024
Prehospital factors predicting mortality in patients with shock: state-wide linkage study.
Article in Open heart, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- IMPELLA COMPARED TO VENOARTERIAL EXTRACORPOREAL MEMBRANE OXYGENATION IN CARDIOGENIC SHOCK: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF PROPENSITY SCORE-MATCHED STUDIES.Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 2025Pooled it
- AI-Based Predictive Models for Cardiogenic Shock in STEMI: Real-World Data for Early Risk Assessment and Prognostic Insights.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with shock treated by emergency medical services (EMS) have high morbidity and mortality. Knowledge of prehospital factors predicting outcomes in patients with shock remains limited. We aimed to describe the prehospital predictors of mortality in patients with non-traumatic shock transported to hospital by EMS.
methodThis is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive ambulance attendances for non-traumatic shock in Victoria, Australia (January 2015-June 2019) linked with government-held administrative data (emergency, admissions and mortality records). Predictors of 30-day mortality were assessed using Cox proportional regressions. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality.
resultsOverall, 21 334 patients with non-traumatic shock (median age 69 years, 54.8% female) were successfully linked with state administrative records. Among this cohort, 9 149 (43%) patients died within 30-days. Compared with survivors, non-survivors had a longer median on-scene time: 60 (35-98) versus 30 (19-50), p <0.001. Non-survivors were more likely to be older (median age in years: 74 (61-84) vs 65 (47-78), p<0.001), had prehospital cardiac arrest requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation (adjusted HR (aHR)=6.26, 95% CI 5.87, 6.69) and had prehospital intubation (aHR=1.07, CI 1.00, 1.14). Reduced 30-day mortality was associated with administration of epinephrine (aHR=0.66, CI 0.62, 0.71) and systolic blood pressures above 80 mm Hg in the prehospital setting.
conclusionThe 30-day mortality from non-traumatic shock is high at 43%. Independent predictors of mortality included age, prehospital cardiac arrest and endotracheal intubation. Interventions that target reversible causes of short-term mortality in patients with non-traumatic shock are a high priority.
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.