Effect of Sleep Disorder on Delirium in Post-Cardiac Surgery Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Post-cardiac surgery patients exhibit a higher incidence of postoperative delirium (PD) compared to non-cardiac surgery patients. Patients with various cardiac diseases suffer from preoperative sleep disorder (SPD) induced by anxiety, depression, breathing disorder, or other factors. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of sleep disorder on delirium in post-cardiac surgery patients. METHODS: We prospectively selected 186 patients undergoing selective cardiac valve surgery. Preoperative sleep quality and cognitive function of all eligible participants were assessed through the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, respectively. The Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit was used to assess PD from the first to seventh day postoperatively. Patients were divided into two groups according to the PD diagnosis: (1) No PD group and (2) the PD group. RESULTS: Of 186 eligible patients, 29 (15.6%) were diagnosed with PD. A univariate analysis showed that gender (p = 0.040), age (p = 0.009), SPD (p = 0.008), intraoperative infusion volume (p = 0.034), postoperative intubation time (p = 0.001), and intensive care unit stay time (p = 0.009) were associated with PD. A multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that age (odds ratio (OR): 1.106; p = 0.001) and SPD (OR: 3.223; p = 0.047) were independently associated with PD. A receiver operating characteristic curve demonstrated that preoperative PSQI was predictive of PD (area under curve: 0.706; 95% confidence interval: 0.595-0.816). A binomial logistic regression analysis showed that there was a significant association between preoperative 6 and 21 PSQI scores and PD incidence (p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative SPD was significantly associated with PD and a main predictor of PD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".