MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980713514 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.119.025015

Occurrence Rate of Delirium in Acute Stroke Settings

2019· review· en· W2980713514 on OpenAlex

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

VenueStroke · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliriumMedicineMeta-analysisStroke (engine)ConfusionIncidence (geometry)LimitingSubgroup analysisPublication biasIntensive care medicineEpidemiologyAcute strokeEmergency medicineInternal medicinePediatricsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Purpose— Delirium is associated with increased mortality, length of stay, and poor functional outcome following critical illness. The epidemiology of delirium in stroke is poorly described. We sought to collate evidence around occurrence (incidence or prevalence) of delirium in acute stroke. Methods— We searched multiple cross-disciplinary electronic databases using a prespecified search strategy, complemented by hand searching. Eligible studies described delirium in acute (first 6 weeks) stroke. We compared delirium occurrence using random-effects models to describe summary estimates. We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa tool, incorporating this in sensitivity analyses. We performed subgroup analyses for delirium diagnostic method (confusion assessment method scoring, clinical diagnosis, other), duration and timing of delirium assessment (>1 or <1 week), and performed meta-regression based on the year of publication. Results— Of 8822 titles, we included 32 papers (6718 participants) in the quantitative analysis. Summary estimate for occurrence of delirium was 25% (95% CI, 20%–30%; moderate quality evidence). Limiting to studies at low risk of bias (22 studies, 4422 participants), the occurrence rate was 23% (95% CI, 17%–28%). Subgroup summary estimates suggest that delirium occurrence may vary with assessment method: confusion assessment method, 21% (95% CI, 16%–27%); clinical diagnosis, 27% (95% CI, 19%–38%); other, 32% (95% CI, 22%–43%) but not with duration and timing of assessment. Meta-regression suggested decline in occurrence of delirium comparing historical to more recent studies (slope, 0.03 [SE, 0.004]; P <0.0001). Conclusions— Delirium is common, affecting 1 in 4 acute stroke patients. Reported rates of delirium may be dependent on assessment method. Our estimate of delirium occurrence could be used for audit, to plan intervention studies, and inform clinical practice. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ . Unique identifier: CRD42015029251.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.311 · 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