Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 481

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival improving over time: Results from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC)

Open access
Daya, Mohamud R., Schmicker, Robert H., Zive, Dana M., Rea, Thomas D., Nichol, Graham, Buick, Jason E., Brooks, Steven, Christenson, Jim, MacPhee, Renee, Craig, Alan, Rittenberger, Jon C., Davis, Daniel P., May, Susanne, Wigginton, Jane, Wang, Henry·2015·Resuscitation

Abstract

Background Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains a leading cause of death and a 2010 meta-analysis concluded that outcomes have not improved over several decades. However, guidelines have changed to emphasize CPR quality, minimization of interruptions, and standardized post-resuscitation care. We sought to evaluate whether OHCA outcomes have improved over time among agencies participating in the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) cardiac arrest registry (Epistry) and randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Methods Observational cohort study of 47,148 EMS-treated OHCA cases in Epistry from 139 EMS agencies at 10 ROC sites that participated in at least one RCT between 1/1/2006 and 12/31/2010. We reviewed patient, scene, event characteristics, and outcomes of EMS-treated OHCA over time, including subgroups with initial rhythm of pulseless ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF). Results Mean response interval, median age and male proportion remained similar over time. Unadjusted survival to discharge increased between 2006 and 2010 for treated OHCA (from 8.2% to 10.4%), as well as for subgroups of VT/VF (21.4% to 29.3%) and bystander witnessed VT/VF (23.5% to 30.3%). Compared with 2006, adjusted survival to discharge was significantly higher in 2010 for treated cases (OR = 1.72; 95% CI 1.53, 1.94), VT/VF cases (OR = 1.69; 95% CI 1.45, 1.98) and bystander witnessed VT/VF cases (OR = 1.65; 95% CI 1.36, 2.00). Tests for trend in each subgroup were significant (p < 0.001). Conclusions ROC-wide survival increased significantly between 2006 and 2010. Additional research efforts are warranted to identify specific factors associated with this improvement.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.02.003

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 41 references

Cited by

See all 481

Metadata

Authors
Daya, M. R., Schmicker, R. H., Zive, D. M., Rea, T. D., Nichol, G., Buick, J. E., Brooks, S., Christenson, J., MacPhee, R., Craig, A., Rittenberger, J. C., Davis, D. P., May, S., Wigginton, J., & Wang, H.
Venue
Resuscitation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-06
Volume
91
Pages
108-115
ISSN
0300-9572 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2139916084
Cited by
481
References
41
FWCI
62.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival improving over time: Results from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.02.003
The paper
Daya, M. R., Schmicker, R. H., Zive, D. M., Rea, T. D., Nichol, G., Buick, J. E., Brooks, S., Christenson, J., MacPhee, R., Craig, A., Rittenberger, J. C., Davis, D. P., May, S., Wigginton, J., & Wang, H. (2015). Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival improving over time: Results from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC). Resuscitation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.02.003

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.