Frequency of full, partial and no recovery from subsyndromal deliriumin older hospital inpatients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequencies of full, partial and no recovery from subsyndromal delirium (SSD) in older hospital inpatients. A secondary objective was to compare the recovery status of patients with SSD or delirium. METHODS: SSD was defined as acute onset of one or more Confusion Assessment Method core symptoms of delirium (fluctuation, inattention, disorganized thinking and altered level of consciousness) not meeting criteria for delirium and not progressing to delirium. The recovery status of medical or surgical inpatients aged 65 and older with SSD was assessed approximately 1 and 3 months after enrolment. Primary outcome categories were full recovery (no core symptoms of delirium), partial recovery (presence of one or more core symptoms but fewer symptoms than at enrolment), no recovery (same number of core symptoms as at enrolment) or death. Nominal logistic regression was used to compare the recovery status of patients with SSD or delirium. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients with SSD were enrolled. At the first follow-up, the frequencies of full, partial and no recovery and death were 40%, 12%, 32% and 16%, respectively; at the second follow-up, the frequencies were 54%, 8%, 21% and 17%, respectively. The frequency of full recovery was much higher in patients with SSD than delirium. CONCLUSION: Small study sample size notwithstanding, the majority (54%) of patients with SSD recovered fully, but a substantial proportion (29%) had a protracted course. It may be important to monitor the longer-term course of SSD and develop strategies to ensure full recovery in all patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".