Cited by 227Cardiac Arrest and ResuscitationDelphi Technique in ResearchPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 104 of the 105 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

COSCA (Core Outcome Set for Cardiac Arrest) in Adults: An Advisory Statement From the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation

Open access

Abstract

Cardiac arrest effectiveness trials have traditionally reported outcomes that focus on survival. A lack of consistency in outcome reporting between trials limits the opportunities to pool results for meta-analysis. The COSCA initiative (Core Outcome Set for Cardiac Arrest), a partnership between patients, their partners, clinicians, research scientists, and the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, sought to develop a consensus core outcome set for cardiac arrest for effectiveness trials. Core outcome sets are primarily intended for large, randomised clinical effectiveness trials (sometimes referred to as pragmatic trials or phase III/IV trials) rather than for pilot or efficacy studies. A systematic review of the literature combined with qualitative interviews among cardiac arrest survivors was used to generate a list of potential outcome domains. This list was prioritised through a Delphi process, which involved clinicians, patients, and their relatives/partners. An international advisory panel narrowed these down to 3 core domains by debate that led to consensus. The writing group refined recommendations for when these outcomes should be measured and further characterised relevant measurement tools. Consensus emerged that a core outcome set for reporting on effectiveness studies of cardiac arrest (COSCA) in adults should include survival, neurological function, and health-related quality of life. This should be reported as survival status and modified Rankin scale score at hospital discharge, at 30 days, or both. Health-related quality of life should be measured with ≥1 tools from Health Utilities Index version 3, Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey, and EuroQol 5D-5L at 90 days and at periodic intervals up to 1 year after cardiac arrest, if resources allow. © 2018 European Resuscitation Council and American Heart Association, Inc. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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.2018.03.022

Cites

104 of 104 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

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?

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 105 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Jacobs, 2004, Resuscitation Councils of Southern Africa). Circulation., 110, 3385
  2. Perkins, 2015, Perioperative, and Resuscitation. Circulation., 131, 1286
  3. Bernhard, 1998, Missing quality of life data in cancer clinical trials: serious problems and challenges, Stat Med., 17, 517, 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980315/15)17:5/7<517::AID-SIM799>3.0.CO;2-S · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 227

Metadata

Authors
Haywood, K., Whitehead, L., Nadkarni, V. M., Achana, F., Beesems, S., Böttiger, B. W., Brooks, A., Castrén, M., Ong, M. E. H., Hazinski, M. F., Koster, R. W., Lilja, G., Long, J., Monsieurs, K. G., Morley, P. T., Morrison, L., Nichol, G., Oriolo, V., Saposnik, G., Smyth, M., Spearpoint, K., Williams, B., & Perkins, G. D.
Venue
Resuscitation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-06
Volume
127
Pages
147-163
ISSN
0300-9572 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2985292347
Cited by
227
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 9
FWCI
37.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Resuscitation (publishedVersion)
  • Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (acceptedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Keywords
cardiac arrest, core outcome set, outcome reporting, effectiveness trials, neurological function, health-related quality of life, survival, modified Rankin Scale, Health Utilities Index 3, SF-36, EQ-5D-5L, consensus development, International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, cardiac arrest survivors

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