MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2429897320 · doi:10.1097/jcn.0000000000000356

A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the Feasibility of a Multicomponent Delirium Prevention Intervention Versus Usual Care in Acute Stroke

2016· article· en· W2429897320 on OpenAlex
Karen L. Rice, Marsha Bennett, Linley Berger, Bethany Jennings, Lynn Eckhardt, Nicole Fabré-LaCoste, David Houghton, Gabriel Vidal, Toby Gropen, Erica Diggs, Erin S. Barry, Jennilee St. John, Sheena Mathew, Allison Egger, Stephanie Ryan, Raymond Egger, David Galarneau, Kenneth Gaines, E. Wesley Ely

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTulane University
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialDeliriumIntervention (counseling)Stroke (engine)Acute strokePhysical therapyPilot trialEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicineNursingEmergency department

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Delirium after acute stroke is a serious complication. Numerous studies support a benefit of multicomponent interventions in minimizing delirium-related complications in at-risk patients, but this has not been reported in acute stroke patients. The purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility of conducting a randomized (delirium care) versus usual standardized stroke care (usual care) in reducing delirium in acute stroke. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study assessed the feasibility of (1) enrollment within the 48-hour window when delirium risk is greatest, (2) measuring cognitive function using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, (3) delivering interventions 7 days per week, and (4) determining delirium incidence in stroke-related cognitive dysfunction. METHODS: A 2-group randomized controlled trial was conducted. Patients admitted with ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes and 50 years or older, English speaking, and without delirium on admit were recruited, consented, and randomized to usual care or delirium care groups. RESULTS: Data from 125 subjects (delirium care, n = 59; usual care, n = 66) were analyzed. All Montreal Cognitive Assessment subscales were completed by 86% of subjects (delirium care, mean [SD], 18.14 [6.03]; usual care, mean [SD], 17.61 [6.29]). Subjects in the delirium care group received a mean of 6.10 therapeutic activities (range, 2-23) and daily medication review by a clinical pharmacist using anticholinergic drug calculations. Delirium incidence was 8% (10/125), 3 in the delirium care group and 7 in the usual care group. CONCLUSION: Findings support the feasibility of delivering a multicomponent delirium prevention intervention in acute stroke and warrants testing intervention effects on delirium outcomes and anticholinergic medication administration.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.296 · 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