ArticleResuscitation plus2026
Development and preliminary validation of an explainable machine learning model for early ROSC detection during chest compression in a swine model of cardiac arrest.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to develop a novel multi-parameter-based system for the early and accurate identification of restoration of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) during chest compression using a machine learning (ML) approach in cardiac arrest (CA) animal models. Methods: Thirteen CA mini-swine models were established by inducing ventricular fibrillation, followed by cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Electrocardiograph (ECG), end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO Results: Among the eight ML models, the Adaboost model performed the best. The Adaboost model accurately identified ROSC without the interruption of chest compression [AUROC 0.891, sensitivity 0.813, specificity 0.957, PPV 0.929, F1-score 0.867 and leading time 18.2 s]. SHAP analysis identified the top dominant predictors of ROSC: ECG high-frequency energy, ECG mean slope, heart rate, respiration rate, perfusion index, and median ETCO Conclusion: A machine learning model integrating non-invasive ECG, ETCO
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.