A systematic review of the outcomes reported in cardiac arrest clinical trials: the need for a core outcome set
Abstract
Background There is a limited guidance for outcome reporting for cardiac arrest trials. This review was conducted to explore the degree of variation and identify trends in outcome reporting. Methods Randomised controlled trials enrolling patients with cardiac arrest (2002-2012) were identified by applying a search strategy to four databases. Titles, abstracts and short-listed studies were independently assessed for eligibility. Data on the primary and secondary outcome measures, details of outcome reporting and reproducibility were extracted. Results 61 studies matched the inclusion criteria. There was wide variation in the focus, method and timing of assessment. Outcomes most commonly reported across studies were: survival (85.2%), activities (52.5%), body structure or function (41.0%), and processes of care (26.2%). Over 160 individual outcomes were reported including 39 different reports of survival measures of which 11 were measurements of ROSC (return of spontaneous circulation). Twenty different assessments of activity limitation were reported; only one was patient-reported. Many assessments were poorly defined or non-reproducible. The majority of outcomes were assessed up to hospital discharge (89.3%). There was no one outcome measure that was assessed across all trials. Conclusions Outcome reporting in cardiac arrest RCTs lacks consistency and transparency. Guidance for improved outcome reporting is urgently required to reduce this heterogeneity in reporting, improve…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Variability in outcome following cardiac arrest has been described in both IHCA and OHCA.
“Variability in outcome following cardiac arrest has been described in both IHCA and OHCA. 217,285,286,291,292”
From European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Ethics of resuscitation and end of life decisions (2021) · cites this paper as [291]
Survey data indicates that both in-hospital systems of care and long-term follow up and rehabilitation differ markedly between hospitals.
“Survey data indicates that both in-hospital systems of care and long-term follow up and rehabilitation differ markedly between hospitals. 291,297 299”
From European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Ethics of resuscitation and end of life decisions (2021) · cites this paper as [291]
Cites
Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider
Williamson, P. R., Altman, D. G., Blazeby, J. M., Clarke, M., Devane, D., Gargon, E., & Tugwell, P. (2012) · Trials · doi:10.1186/1745-6215-13-132 · Cited by 1,661 · see citing works
Developing core outcome measurement sets for clinical trials: OMERACT filter 2.0
Boers, M., Kirwan, J. R., Wells, G., Beaton, D., Gossec, L., d'Agostino, M.-A., Conaghan, P. G., Bingham, C. O., Brooks, P., Landewé, R., et al. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.11.013 · Cited by 781 · see citing works
Kostanjsek, N. (2011) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-11-s4-s3 · Cited by 434 · see citing works
Haywood, K. L., Staniszewska, S., & Chapman, S. (2012) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-011-9921-8 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Ethics of resuscitation and end of life decisions
Mentzelopoulos, S. D., Couper, K., Voorde, P. V. D., Druwé, P., Blom, M., Perkins, G. D., Lulic, I., Djakow, J., Raffay, V., Lilja, G., et al. (2021) · Resuscitation · doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.02.017 · Cited by 246 · see citing works
Self-citationHaywood, K., Whitehead, L., Nadkarni, V. M., Achana, F., Beesems, S., Böttiger, B. W., Brooks, A., Castrén, M., Ong, M. E. H., Hazinski, M. F., et al. (2018) · Resuscitation · doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.03.022 · Cited by 227 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Whitehead, L., Perkins, G. D., Clarey, A., & Haywood, K. L.
- Affiliations
- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
- Royal Victoria Hospital (GB)
- University of Warwick (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Haywood, K.L.
- Venue
- Resuscitation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-03
- Volume
- 88
- Pages
- 150-157
- ISSN
- 0300-9572 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2130741939
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 2.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Resuscitation (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0514-10139)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- cardiac arrest, outcome reporting, core outcome set, return of spontaneous circulation, survival outcomes, activity limitation, outcome heterogeneity, trial reporting quality
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Trials as Topic, Heart Arrest, Humans, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Treatment Outcome
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review