Predicting outcome in older hospital patients with delirium: a systematic literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".