ArticleScientific reports2025
Long-term outcomes of successful cardiac resuscitation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies examining long-term prognosis after successful cardiac resuscitation (SCR) are limited owing to the high mortality and challenges of long-term follow-up. Consequently, data regarding brain disorders are lacking. In this retrospective study, we examined the incidence of brain disorders following SCR and explored the association between various confounding factors using data from the South Korean National Health Insurance Service. Patients who underwent SCR between 2010 and 2017 were recruited, with washout/follow-up periods of 2/3 years, yielding 572 and 1,144 patients in the successful cardiac resuscitation and control groups, respectively, following propensity score matching. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for brain disorders (stroke, epilepsy, Alzheimer's disease, and Parkinson's disease) were estimated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Patients who underwent SCR had a 1.82-fold higher risk of developing brain disorders (95% CI: 1.40-2.37) than controls. Hazard ratios were 1.68 (95% CI: 1.09-2.61), 2.37 (95% CI: 1.58-3.53), and 1.56 (95% CI: 1.02-2.40) for stroke, epilepsy, and Alzheimer's disease, respectively. However, for Parkinson's disease, the hazard ratio (1.35 [95% CI: 0.48-3.78]) was not statistically significant, likely due to the small sample (15 patients). This study confirmed the increased risk of brain disorders in patients who undergo SCR.
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.