ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2024
External Validation and Comparison of Statistical and Machine Learning-Based Models in Predicting Outcomes Following Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Evaluating YOLO for dental caries diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Evidence-based dentistry · 2025Pooled it
- Validation of the UB-ROSC Score for Predicting OHCA Survival in Chiayi City, Taiwan.Emergency medicine international · 2026Article
- Therapeutic perspective of postbiotics in managing health of women with polycystic ovarian syndrome: a holistic approach.Inflammopharmacology · 2025Review
- Machine Learning Models for Predicting in-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Comparative Analysis with Logistic Regression.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- P-ROSC, UB-ROSC, and RACA Scores in Predicting the Return of Spontaneous Circulation in Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Retrospective Cohort.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Application of multi-feature-based machine learning models to predict neurological outcomes of cardiac arrest.Resuscitation plus · 2024Review
- Mapping artificial intelligence models in emergency medicine: A scoping review on artificial intelligence performance in emergency care and education.Turkish journal of emergency medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to validate and compare the performance of statistical (Utstein-Based Return of Spontaneous Circulation and Shockable Rhythm-Witness-Age-pH) and machine learning-based (Prehospital Return of Spontaneous Circulation and Swedish Cardiac Arrest Risk Score) models in predicting the outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the models' performance. METHODS AND
resultsThis retrospective analysis included adult patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest treated at 3 academic hospitals between 2015 and 2023. The primary outcome was neurological outcomes at hospital discharge. Patients were divided into pre- (2015-2019) and post-2020 (2020-2023) subgroups to examine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcome prediction. The models' performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and compared by the DeLong test. The analysis included 2161 patients, 1241 (57.4%) of whom were resuscitated after 2020. The cohort had a median age of 69.2 years, and 1399 patients (64.7%) were men. Overall, 69 patients (3.2%) had neurologically intact survival. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for predicting neurological outcomes were 0.85 (95% CI, 0.83-0.87) for the Utstein-Based Return of Spontaneous Circulation score, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.81-0.84) for the Shockable Rhythm-Witness-Age-pH score, 0.79 (95% CI, 0.78-0.81) for the Prehospital Return of Spontaneous Circulation score, and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.77-0.81) for the Swedish Cardiac Arrest Risk Score model. The Utstein-Based Return of Spontaneous Circulation score significantly outperformed both the Prehospital Return of Spontaneous Circulation score (
conclusionsIn this external validation, both statistical and machine learning-based models demonstrated excellent and fair performance, respectively, in predicting neurological outcomes despite different model architectures. The predictive performance of all evaluated clinical scoring systems was not significantly influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.