MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411256664 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-102028

Protocol for a prospective cohort study to determine the multimodal biomarkers of delirium and new dementia after acute illness in older adults: ORCHARD-PS

2025· article· en· W4411256664 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jasmine Gan, Lily Elderton, Meenu Vijayakumar Sheela, Jessica Knight, John Louca, Sarah Evans, Kinza Shahab, Nicola Lovett, Mary Sneade, Nycola Muchenje, Mariya Fenchyn, Davide Simonato, Aubretia McColl, Sarah T. Pendlebury

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNIHR Oxford Biomedical Research CentreJohn Fell Fund, University of OxfordNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineDeliriumDementiaProspective cohort studyProtocol (science)Cohort studyEpidemiologyGerontologyPsychiatryCohortAlternative medicineDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Delirium is common in the older hospital population and is often precipitated by acute illness. Delirium is associated with poor outcomes including subsequent cognitive decline and dementia and may therefore be a modifiable risk factor for dementia. However, the mechanisms underpinning the delirium-dementia relationship and the role of coexisting acute illness factors remain uncertain. Current biomarker studies of delirium have limitations including lack of detailed delirium characterisation with few studies on neurodegenerative or neuroimaging biomarkers especially in the acute setting. The Oxford and Reading Cognitive Health After Recovery from acute illness and Delirium-Prospective Study (ORCHARD-PS) aims to elucidate the pathophysiology of delirium and subsequent cognitive decline after acute illness in older adults, through acquisition of multimodal biomarkers for deep phenotyping of delirium and acute illness, and follow-up for incident dementia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 65 years without advanced dementia, nursing home residence, end-stage frailty or terminal illness are eligible. Details of potential participants are communicated to the research team and written informed consent or consultee agreement is obtained. Participants are interviewed as soon as possible after admission/assessment using a structured proforma.Data are collected on demographics, diagnosis and comorbidities, social and functional background. Delirium is assessed using the 4A's test, Confusion Assessment Method (long-form), Observational Scale of Level of Arousal, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale and diagnosed using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition criteria. Delirium is categorised by time of onset (prevalent vs incident), dementia status, motoric subtype, severity and duration. Cognitive tests include the 10-point Abbreviated Mental Test and Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Participants are reassessed every 48-72 hours if remaining in hospital. Informant questionnaire data and interview are supplemented by hand searching of medical records and linkage to electronic patient records for nursing risk assessments, vital observations, laboratory results and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision diagnostic and procedure codes.In-person follow-up with more detailed cognitive testing and informant interview is undertaken at 3 months, and 1 and 3 years supplemented with indirect follow-up using medical records. Blood banking is performed at baseline and all follow-ups for future biomarker analyses. CT-brain and MRI-brain imaging acquired as part of standard care is obtained for quantification of brain atrophy and white matter disease/stroke supplemented by research CT-brain imaging. Outcomes include length of hospitalisation, change in care needs, institutionalisation, mortality, readmission, longitudinal changes in cognitive and functional status and incident dementia. Biomarker associations with delirium, and with incident dementia on follow-up, will be determined using logistic or Cox regression as appropriate, unadjusted and adjusted for covariates including demographics, baseline cognition, frailty, comorbidity and apolipoprotein E genotype. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: ORCHARD-PS is approved by the South Central-Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (REC Reference: 23/SC/0199). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN24171810.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0690.019

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.372 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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