ArticleResuscitation plus2026
External validation and comparative performance of ACLS, SARICA, NULL-PLEASE, BDR scores for in-hospital mortality after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prognostic scores are used to estimate outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), but their comparative performance in external cohorts remains unclear. We externally validated the ACLS, SARICA, NULL-PLEASE, and BDR scores for predicting in-hospital mortality after return of spontaneous circulation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study using the OHCA Research Database. Adult patients with emergency medical services-attended OHCA who achieved return of spontaneous circulation were included. Patients without data required for score calculation, including brain computed tomography, blood gas analysis, or lactate measurement, were excluded. Discrimination, calibration, and diagnostic performance were assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, decile-based calibration plots, and standard diagnostic indices. Results: Among 1036 included patients, 718 (69.3%) died during hospitalization. The BDR score showed the highest discrimination for in-hospital mortality, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.775 (95% CI, 0.745-0.805), followed by NULL-PLEASE (0.756; 95% CI, 0.723-0.788), modified SARICA (0.746; 95% CI, 0.714-0.779), and modified ACLS (0.662; 95% CI, 0.627-0.697). BDR, NULL-PLEASE, and modified SARICA all significantly outperformed modified ACLS, whereas differences among these three scores were not statistically significant. At Youden-index thresholds, BDR demonstrated the highest sensitivity and negative predictive value, but specificity was only moderate across all models. Conclusions: BDR, NULL-PLEASE, and modified SARICA demonstrated fair discrimination for in-hospital mortality after OHCA, whereas modified ACLS showed lower discrimination. Because clinically practical thresholds had limited specificity, these scores should be interpreted cautiously and used only as adjuncts to serial multimodal assessment.
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.