Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 351

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

The CAHP (Cardiac Arrest Hospital Prognosis) score: a tool for risk stratification after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Open access
Maupain, Carole, Bougouin, Wulfran, Lamhaut, Lionel, Deye, Nicolas, Diehl, Jean-Luc, Geri, Guillaume, Perier, Marie-Cécile, Beganton, Frankie, Marijon, Eloi, Jouven, Xavier, Cariou, Alain, Dumas, Florence·2016·European Heart Journal

Abstract

AIMS: Survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains disappointingly low. Among patients admitted alive, early prognostication remains challenging. This study aims to establish a stratification score for patients admitted in intensive care unit (ICU) after OHCA, according to their neurological outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: The CAHP (Cardiac Arrest Hospital Prognosis) score was developed from the Sudden Death Expertise Center registry (Paris, France). The primary outcome was poor neurological outcome defined as Cerebral Performance Category 3, 4, or 5 at hospital discharge. Independent prognostic factors were identified using logistic regression analysis and thresholds defined to stratify low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups. The CAHP score was validated in both a prospective and an external data set (Parisian Cardiac Arrest Registry). The developmental data set included 819 patients admitted from May 2011 to December 2012. After multivariate analysis, seven variables were independently associated with poor neurological outcome and subsequently included in the CAHP score (age, non-shockable rhythm, time from collapse to basic life support, time from basic life support to return of spontaneous circulation, location of cardiac arrest, epinephrine dose, and arterial pH). Three risks groups were identified: low risk (score ≤150, 39% of unfavourable outcome), medium risk (score 150-200, 81% of unfavourable outcome) and high-risk group (score ≥200, 100% of unfavourable outcome). The AUC of the CAHP score were 0.93, and the discrimination value in the validation data sets was consistent (respectively, AUC 0.91 and 0.85). CONCLUSION: The CAHP score represents a simple tool for early stratification of patients admitted in ICU after OHCA. A high-risk category of patients with very poor prognosis can be easily identified.

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 · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv556

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 351

Metadata

Authors
Maupain, C., Bougouin, W., Lamhaut, L., Deye, N., Diehl, J.-L., Geri, G., Perier, M.-C., Beganton, F., Marijon, E., Jouven, X., Cariou, A., & Dumas, F.
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2015-10-24
Volume
37
Issue
42
Pages
3222-3228
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2099301588
Cited by
351
References
25
FWCI
14.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: The CAHP (Cardiac Arrest Hospital Prognosis) score: a tool for risk stratification after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehv556
The paper
Maupain, C., Bougouin, W., Lamhaut, L., Deye, N., Diehl, J.-L., Geri, G., Perier, M.-C., Beganton, F., Marijon, E., Jouven, X., Cariou, A., & Dumas, F. (2016). The CAHP (Cardiac Arrest Hospital Prognosis) score: a tool for risk stratification after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehv556

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.