Neurophysiologic predictors of individual risk for <scp>post‐operative</scp> delirium after elective surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Post-surgical delirium is associated with increased morbidity, lasting cognitive decline, and loss of functional independence. Within a conceptual framework that delirium is triggered by stressors when vulnerabilities exist in cerebral connectivity and plasticity, we previously suggested that neurophysiologic measures might identify individuals at risk for post-surgical delirium. Here we demonstrate the feasibility of the approach and provide preliminary experimental evidence of the predictive value of such neurophysiologic measures for the risk of delirium in older persons undergoing elective surgery. METHODS: Electroencephalography (EEG) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) were collected from 23 patients prior to elective surgery. Resting-state EEG spectral power ratio (SPR) served as a measure of integrity of neural circuits. TMS-EEG metrics of plasticity (TMS-plasticity) were used as indicators of brain capacity to respond to stressors. Presence or absence of delirium was assessed using the confusion assessment method (CAM). We included individuals with no baseline clinically relevant cognitive impairment (MoCA scores ≥21) in order to focus on subclinical neurophysiological measures. RESULTS: In patients with no baseline cognitive impairment (N = 20, age = 72 ± 6), 3 developed post-surgical delirium (MoCA = 24 ± 2.6) and 17 did not (controls; MoCA = 25 ± 2.4). Patients who developed delirium had pre-surgical resting-state EEG power ratios outside the 95% confidence interval of controls, and 2/3 had TMS-plasticity measures outside the 95% CI of controls. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with our proposed conceptual framework, this pilot study suggests that non-invasive and scalable neurophysiologic measures can identify individuals at risk of post-operative delirium. Specifically, abnormalities in resting-state EEG spectral power or TMS-plasticity may indicate sub-clinical risk for post-surgery delirium. Extension and confirmation of these findings in a larger sample is needed to assess the clinical utility of the proposed neurophysiologic markers, and to identify specific connectivity and plasticity targets for therapeutic interventions that might minimize the risk of delirium.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".