MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747249016 · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2017.00274

A Novel Stress-Diathesis Model to Predict Risk of Post-operative Delirium: Implications for Intra-operative Management

2017· article· en· W2747249016 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Renée El‐Gabalawy, Ronak Patel, Kayla Kilborn, Caitlin Blaney, Christopher Hoban, Lawrence Ryner, Duane J. Funk, Regina Legaspi, Joseph A. Fisher, James Duffin, David J. Mikulis, W. Alan C. Mutch

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Aging Neuroscience · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsManitoba Harm Reduction NetworkUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre FoundationHealth Sciences Centre Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicinePoint of deliveryDeliriumPerioperativeAnesthesiaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Risk assessment for post-operative delirium (POD) is poorly developed. Improved metrics could greatly facilitate perioperative care as costs associated with POD are staggering. In this preliminary study, we develop a novel stress diathesis model based on comprehensive pre-operative psychiatric and neuropsychological testing, a blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) carbon dioxide (CO2) stress test, and high fidelity measures of intraoperative parameters that may interact facilitating POD. Methods: The study was approved by the IRB at the University of Manitoba and registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02126215. Twelve patients were studied. Pre-operative psychiatric symptom measures and neuropsychological testing preceded MRI featuring a BOLD MRI CO2 stress test whereby BOLD scans were conducted while exposing participants to a rigorously controlled CO2 stimulus. During surgery the patient had hemodynamics and end-tidal gases downloaded at 0.5 hz. Postoperatively, the presence of POD and POD severity was comprehensively assessed using the Confusion Assessment Measure –Severity (CAM-S) scoring instrument on days 0 (surgery) through post-operative day 5, and patients were followed up at least 1 month post-operatively. Results: Six of 12 patients had no evidence of POD (non-POD). Three patients had POD and 3 had clinically significant confusional states (referred as subthreshold POD; ST-POD) (score ≥ 5/19 on the CAM-S). Average severity for delirium was 1.3 in the non-POD group, 3.2 in ST-POD, and 6.1 in POD (F-statistic=15.4, p < 0.001). Depressive symptoms, and cognitive measures of semantic fluency and executive functioning/processing speed were significantly associated with POD. Second level analysis revealed an increased inverse BOLD responsiveness to CO2 pre-operatively in ST-POD and marked increase in the POD groups when compared to the non-POD group. An association was also noted for the patient population to manifest leucoaraiosis as assessed with advanced neuroimaging techniques. Results provide preliminary support for the interacting diatheses (vulnerabilities) and intraoperative stressors on the POD phenotype. Conclusions: The stress-diathesis model has the potential to aid in risk assessment for POD. Based on these initial findings, we make some recommendations for intraoperative management for patients at risk of POD.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Aging NeuroscienceSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207