Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 401

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Duration of resuscitation efforts and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest: an observational study

Open access
Goldberger, Zachary D, Chan, Paul S, Berg, Robert A, Kronick, Steven L, Cooke, Colin R, Lu, Mingrui, Banerjee, Mousumi, Hayward, Rodney A, Krumholz, Harlan M, Nallamothu, Brahmajee K·2012·The Lancet
DOI 10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60862-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background During in-hospital cardiac arrests, it is uncertain how long resuscitation should continue prior to termination of efforts. We hypothesized that the duration of resuscitation varies across hospitals, and that patients at hospitals with longer attempts have higher survival rates. Methods Between 2000 and 2008, we identified 64,339 patients with cardiac arrests at 435 hospitals within a large national registry. For each hospital, we calculated the median duration of resuscitation before termination of efforts among its non-survivors as a measure of the hospital’s overall tendency for longer attempts. We then determined the association between a hospital’s tendency for longer attempts and risk-adjusted survival using multilevel regression models. Findings The overall proportion of patients achieving immediate survival with return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) was 48·5% while 15·4% survived to discharge. For patients achieving ROSC, the median resuscitation time was 12 minutes (IQR: 6–21) while it was 20 minutes (IQR: 14–30) for those not achieving ROSC (i.e., non-survivors). Compared with patients at hospitals with the shortest attempts (median duration, 16 minutes), patients at hospitals with the longest attempts (median duration, 25 minutes) had a higher likelihood of ROSC (adjusted risk-ratio 1·12, [95% CI: 1·06–1·18]; p <0·001) and survival to discharge (adjusted risk-ratio 1·12, [95% CI: 1·02–1·23]; p=0·021). These findings were more prominent in cardiac arrests due to asystole and pulseless electrical activity (p for interaction<0.01 for both ROSC and survival to discharge). Interpretation The duration of resuscitation attempts varies across hospitals. Patients at hospitals with longer attempts have a higher likelihood of ROSC and survival to discharge, particularly when the arrest is due to asystole and pulseless electrical activity. Funding The American Heart Association, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, the National Institutes of Health.

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/s0140-6736(12)60862-9

Cites

25 of 25 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 25 references

Cited by

See all 401

Metadata

Authors
Goldberger, Z. D., Chan, P. S., Berg, R. A., Kronick, S. L., Cooke, C. R., Lu, M., Banerjee, M., Hayward, R. A., Krumholz, H. M., & Nallamothu, B. K.
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-10
Volume
380
Issue
9852
Pages
1473-1481
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
DOI
10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60862-9
OpenAlex
W2139233184
Cited by
401
References
25
FWCI
36.58
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: Duration of resuscitation efforts and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest: an observational study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60862-9
The paper
Goldberger, Z. D., Chan, P. S., Berg, R. A., Kronick, S. L., Cooke, C. R., Lu, M., Banerjee, M., Hayward, R. A., Krumholz, H. M., & Nallamothu, B. K. (2012). Duration of resuscitation efforts and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest: an observational study. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60862-9

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.