MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386752741 · doi:10.2147/cia.s410687

Development of a Brief Cognitive Screening Tool for Predicting Postoperative Delirium in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease: A Secondary Analysis

2023· article· en· W4386752741 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yongde Zhou, Xiaoxiao Wang, Zhengqian Li, Yu Ma, Cuiping Yu, Yao Chen, Jian Ding, Jianfeng Yu, Rongsong Zhou, Ning Yang, Taotao Liu, Xiangyang Guo, Ting Fan, Chengmei Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Interventions in Aging · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPeking University Third HospitalPeking UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineReceiver operating characteristicDeliriumCognitionLogistic regressionMini–Mental State ExaminationAudiologyCognitive impairmentInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: A simple, rapid, and effective cognitive screening test appropriate for fast-paced settings with limited resources and staff is essential, especially preoperatively. This study aimed to develop and validate the short versions of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for predicting postoperative delirium (POD) in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) who were scheduled for surgery. Methods: The current study was a secondary analysis of data collected from 128 inpatients scheduled for deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nuclei (STN-DBS) lasting > 60 min, at Tsinghua University Yuquan Hospital, China. Preoperative cognitive screening was performed during the preoperative visit using the MMSE and MoCA. The optimal MMSE and MoCA cut-off scores for detecting PD-MCI was 27 and 23 respectively. The POD was assessed twice a day on the first postoperative day until discharge by the confusion assessment method. The backward conditional logistic regression analysis was used to organize the reduced versions of the MMSE or MoCA. Also, the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) were examined using the DeLong test. Results: 125/128 PD patients were included in the analysis, and 27 (21.6%) developed POD. The MMSE reduced version (orientation to time, attention and calculation, and comprehension) demonstrated performance similar to the original MMSE in predicting POD ( z =0.820, p =0.412). The AUC of the original MoCA and the short MoCA (visuospatial and executive attention and orientation) were 0.808 and 0.826, respectively. There was no significantly difference in the AUC values between the tests ( z =0.561, p =0.575). Conclusion: Our simplified MMSE and MoCA could be efficiently used to identify patients at risk for POD. Also, short cognitive tests could be considered while predicting POD in fast-paced preoperative settings with limited resources and staff. Plain Language Summary: Routine preoperative cognitive screening is very important in predicting postoperative delirium.MMSE and MoCA are the most commonly used cognitive testing method which normally takes a long time.The short variant of MMSE and MoCA show a predictive performance similar to the original tests. Keywords: Parkinson’s disease, preoperative cognitive impairment, mini-mental state examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.325 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Interventions in AgingSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207