Core symptoms not meeting criteria for delirium are associated with cognitive and functional impairment and mood and behavior problems in older long-term care residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The immediate clinical significance of Confusion Assessment Method (CAM)-defined core symptoms of delirium not meeting criteria for delirium is unclear. This study proposed to determine if such symptoms are associated with cognitive and functional impairment, mood and behavior problems and increased Burden of Care (BOC) in older long-term care (LTC) residents. METHODS: The study was a secondary analysis of data collected for a prospective cohort study of delirium. Two hundred and fifty-eight LTC residents aged 65 years and older in seven LTC facilities had monthly assessments (for up to six months) of CAM - defined core symptoms of delirium (fluctuation, inattention, disorganized thinking, and altered level of consciousness) and five outcome measures: Mini-Mental State Exam, Barthel Index, Cornell Scale for Depression, Nursing Home Behavioral Problems Scale, and Burden of Care. Associations between core symptoms and the five outcome measures were analyzed using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Core symptoms of delirium not meeting criteria for delirium among residents with and without dementia were associated with cognitive and functional impairment and mood and behavior problems but not increased BOC. The associations appear to be intermediate between those of full delirium and no core symptoms and were greater for residents with than without dementia. CONCLUSION: CAM-defined core symptoms of delirium not meeting criteria for delirium appear to be associated with cognitive and functional impairment and mood and behavior problems in LTC residents with or without dementia. These findings may have implications for the prevention and management of such impairments and problems 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".