MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387964894 · doi:10.1186/s13741-023-00345-9

The impact of preoperative malnutrition on postoperative delirium: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4387964894 on OpenAlex
Bo Dong, Jing Wang, Li Pan, Jianli Li, Meinv Liu, Huanhuan Zhang

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

VenuePerioperative Medicine · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHebei Provincial Key Research Projects
KeywordsMalnutritionMedicineMeta-analysisDeliriumCochrane LibraryOdds ratioSubgroup analysisProspective cohort studyAnthropometryCohort studyInternal medicineSurgeryIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common postoperative complication, characterized by disturbance of attention, perception, and consciousness within 1 week after surgery, and linked to cognitive decline, increased mortality, and other serious surgical outcomes. Early identification and treatment of risk factors for POD could reduce the occurrence of delirium and the related poor outcomes. Malnutrition as a possible precipitating factor, defined as the poor anthropometric, functional, and clinical outcomes of nutrient deficiency, has been investigated. However, the evidence is controversial. The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to comprehensively assess the correlation between preoperative malnutrition and POD. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were used to search prospective cohort articles that explored the correlation between preoperative malnutrition and POD from inception until September 30, 2022. Two researchers independently conducted the literature selection and data extraction. The quality of the literature was evaluated according to the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for POD associated with malnutrition relative to normal nutritional status were calculated. RESULTS: Seven prospective cohort studies qualified for the meta-analysis, which included 2701 patients. The pooled prevalence of preoperative malnutrition was 15.1% (408/2701), and POD occurred in 428 patients (15.8%). The NOS score was above 7 points in all 7 studies. Our results demonstrated that the pooled OR for malnutrition and POD was 2.32 (95% CI 1.62-3.32) based on a random-effects model. Our subgroup analysis suggested that the relationship between malnutrition and POD was significant in adults following noncardiac surgery (OR = 3.04, 95% CI, 1.99-4.62, P < 0.001), while there was no statistical significance in adults following cardiac surgery (OR = 1.76, 95% CI, 0.96-3.22, P = 0.07). Additionally, in the subgroup analysis based on different malnutrition assessment tools (MNA-SF versus others), a significant association was found in the MNA-SF group (OR = 3.04, 95% CI, 1.99-4.62, P < 0.001), but not in the others group (OR = 1.76, 95% CI, 0.96-3.22, P = 0.07). Other subgroup analyses showed that this association was not significantly affected by evaluation instruments for POD, location of the study, or quality of the article (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the currently available evidence, our results suggested that preoperative malnutrition was independently associated with POD in adult surgical patients.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.306 · 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