In 2015, ILCOR adopted a new process that would enable a near-continuous review of resuscitation science by using task force–prioritized population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) questions. There are 2 distinct pathways for evidence evaluation. Knowledge synthesis units (KSUs), organizations with expertise in searching scientific databases and performing systematic reviews and meta-analyses, will address PICOs that are large and complicated or topics for which several PICOs can be grouped together and addressed through sensitivity or subgroup analyses. Contracted systematic reviewers will undertake less complex systematic reviews involving typically single PICO questions. Both pathways involve content experts from respective task forces, and critical steps during evidence evaluation are discussed with relevant task forces when needed.
The CEE process provides an annual International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations summary publication that will include the cardiopulmonary resuscitation science reviewed by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation in the previous year. Each of these includes a summary of the science and its quality based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria and treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force members are provided in the Justification and Evidence to Decision Framework Highlights section as well as a prioritization and listing of the top 3 knowledge gaps for each PICO Question.