Subsyndromal Delirium in Older Long‐Term Care Residents: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of, risk factors for, and outcomes of subsyndromal delirium (SSD) in older long-term care (LTC) residents and, secondarily, to explore the use of a more-restrictive definition of SSD. DESIGN: Cohort study with repeated weekly assessments for up to 6 months. SETTING: Seven LTC facilities in Montreal and Quebec City, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred four LTC residents aged 65 and older and free of delirium core symptoms at baseline. MEASUREMENTS: The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), Delirium Index (DI), Hierarchic Dementia Scale (HDS), and Barthel Index (BI) were completed at baseline. The MMSE, CAM, and DI were repeated weekly for 6 months. SSD1 required one or more CAM core symptoms; SSD2, a more-restrictive definition, required two or more CAM core symptoms. Outcomes at 6 months were decline on the MMSE, HDS, and BI; mortality; and a composite outcome. RESULTS: Sixty-eight of 104 residents had SSD1. In survival analysis, the incidence was 5.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.1-6.7) per 100 person-weeks of follow-up. In multivariate analysis, risk factors were male sex and more-severe cognitive impairment at baseline. The differences in outcomes between residents with and without SSD1 were small and not statistically significant. SSD2 had a lower incidence (1.3, 95% CI = 0.9-1.9), similar risk factors, and statistically significantly worse cognitive outcomes. CONCLUSION: SSD2 appears to be a clinically important disorder in older LTC residents. Despite limited statistical power, these findings have potentially important implications for clinical practice and research in LTC settings.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".