MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386191939 · doi:10.7759/cureus.44171

The Association of Preoperative Trail Making Tests With Postoperative Delirium

2023· article· en· W4386191939 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mrityunjay Mundu, Ram Chandra Besra, Niranjan Mardi, Saurav K Singh, Puja Pallavi, Ajay Kumar Bakhla

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentHospital Anxiety and Depression ScaleDeliriumObservational studyTrail Making TestAnxietyDepression (economics)Internal medicineCognitive impairmentCognitionAnesthesiaPhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims The aim of the present study was to investigate the preoperative Trail Making Test (TMT) and its association with postoperative delirium. Materials and methods This cross-sectional, observational study consisted of 51 patients admitted to the surgical ward for any planned operative procedure. Consenting patients provided their sociodemographic information, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test, and Trail Making Test (TMT) were applied. Results A total of 51 patients (66.7% male and 33.3% female) were categorized as the "normal" group (n=34), completing TMT in time, and the "slow" group (n=17). The mean age was 45.05 ± 13.69 for the normal group and 44.29 ± 10.95 for the slow group. The HADS score mean was 15.02 ± 9.52 and 11.64 ± 5.73, respectively, for these two groups (t = -1.577; degrees of freedom {df} = 47.11; p = 0.121). However, the "normal" group scored significantly higher MoCA scores in comparison to the slow group (26.35 ± 1.06 and 24.29 ± 1.10, respectively) (t = -6.410; df = 49; p = 0.000). Conclusions The study shows that the TMT can indicate effectively the cognitive decline in preoperative patients, which predicts postoperative 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureus→Same topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders→French-language works237,207→