MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1714890117 · doi:10.1002/gps.4344

Predicting outcome in older hospital patients with delirium: a systematic literature review

2015· review· en· W1714890117 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersAge UKVersus ArthritisArthritis Research UKMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsDeliriumPsycINFOMedicineDementiaMEDLINEPsychiatrySystematic reviewDepression (economics)Intensive care medicineInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Delirium is a serious neuropsychiatric syndrome common in older hospitalised adults. It is associated with poor outcomes, however not all people with delirium have poor outcomes and the risk factors for adverse outcomes within this group are not well described. The objective was to report which predictors of outcome had been reported in the literature. METHODS: We performed a systematic review by an initial electronic database search of MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO using four key search criteria. These were: (1) participants with a diagnosis of delirium, (2) clearly defined outcome measures, (3) a clearly defined variable as predictor of outcomes and (4) participants in the general hospital, rehabilitation and care home settings, excluding intensive care. Studies were then selected in a systematic fashion using specific predetermined criteria by three reviewers. RESULTS: A total of 559 articles were screened, and 57 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Twenty seven studies describing 18 different predictors of poor outcome were reported. The studies were rated by the Newcastle-Ottawa Score and were generally at low risk of bias. Four broad themes of predictor were identified; five delirium related predictors, two co-morbid psychiatric illness related predictors, eight patient related predictors and three biomarker related predictors. The most numerously described and clinically important appear to be the duration of the delirium episode, a hypoactive motor subtype, delirium severity and pre-existing psychiatric morbidity with dementia or depression. These are all associated with poorer delirium outcomes. CONCLUSION: Important predictors of poor outcomes in patients with delirium have been demonstrated. These could be used in clinical practice to focus direct management and guide discussions regarding prognosis. These results also demonstrate a number of key unknowns, where further research to explore delirium prognosis is recommended and is vital to improve understanding and management of this condition.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it