Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Part 4: Advanced life support

2015; Elsevier BV; Volume: 95; Linguagem: Inglês

10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.07.042

1873-1570

Jasmeet Soar, Clifton W. Callaway, Mayuki Aibiki, Bernd W. Böttiger, Steven C. Brooks, Charles D. Deakin, Michael W. Donnino, Saúl Drajer, Walter Kloeck, Peter T. Morley, Laurie J. Morrison, Robert W. Neumar, Tonia Nicholson, Jerry P. Nolan, Kazuo Okada, Brian J. O’Neil, Edison Ferreira de Paiva, Michael Parr, Tzong-Luen Wang, Jonathan Witt, Lars W. Andersen, Katherine M. Berg, Claudio Sandroni, Steve Lin, Eric J. Lavonas, Eyal Golan, Mohammed Alhelail, Amit Chopra, Michael N. Cocchi, Tobias Cronberg, Katie N. Dainty, Ian R. Drennan, Michael Fries, Romergryko G. Geocadin, Jan‐Thorsten Gräsner, Asger Granfeldt, Sarah Heikal, Peter J. Kudenchuk, Anthony T. Lagina, Bo Løfgren, Jill M. Mhyre, Koenraad G. Monsieurs, Allan R. Mottram, Tommaso Pellis, Joshua C. Reynolds, Giuseppe Ristagno, Fred A. Severyn, Markus B. Skrifvars, William C. Stacey, Jonathon M. Sullivan, Sarah L. Todhunter, Gino Vissers, Stephen West, Wolfgang A. Wetsch, Natalie Sui Miu Wong, Theodoros Xanthos, Carolyn M. Zelop, Janice L. Zimmerman,

Trauma and Emergency Care Studies

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) Advanced Life Support (ALS) Task Force performed detailed systematic reviews based on the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies 1 Institute of Medicine. Standards for systematic reviews. 2011 Google Scholar and using the methodological approach proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group. 2 Schünemann H. Brożek J. Guyatt G. Oxman A. GRADE handbook. 2013 Google Scholar Questions to be addressed (using the PICO [population, intervention, comparator, outcome] format) 3 O’Connor D. Green S. Higgins J.P.T. Chapter 5. Defining the review questions and developing criteria for including studies. in: The Cochrane Collaboration Higgins J. Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0. 2011 Google Scholar were prioritized by ALS Task Force members (by voting). Prioritization criteria included awareness of significant new data and new controversies or questions about practice. Questions about topics no longer relevant to contemporary practice or where little new research has occurred were given lower priority. The ALS Task Force prioritized 42 PICO questions for review. With the assistance of information specialists, a detailed search for relevant articles was performed in each of 3 online databases (PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library).