MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411640850 · doi:10.2196/67958

Predicting Postoperative Delirium in Older Patients Before Elective Surgery: Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

2025· article· en· W4411640850 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Shun-Chin Jim Wu, Nitin Sharma, Anne Bauch, Hao-Chun Yang, Jasmine L. Hect, Sören Wagner, Bernd R. Förstner, Christine A. F. Von Arnim, Tobias Kaufmann, Gerhard W. Eschweiler, Thomas Wolfers

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDeliriumPreprintRetrospective cohort studyCohort studyCohortSurgeryGeneral surgeryIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Elective surgeries for older adults are increasing. Machine learning could enhance risk assessment, influencing surgical planning and postoperative care. Preoperative cognitive assessment may facilitate early detection and management of postoperative delirium (POD). Objective: This study aims to assess machine learning models' predictive ability for POD, focusing on the added predictive value of the neuropsychological assessments before elective surgery. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from the multicenter PAWEL (Patient safety, Efficiency and Life quality in elective surgery) and PAWEL-R (risk) studies, encompassing older patients (≥70 y) undergoing elective surgeries from July 2017 to April 2019. A total of 1624 patients (52.3% male, N=850; age: mean 77.9, SD 4.9 years) were included, with a POD diagnosis made before discharge. Sociodemographic, clinical, surgical, and neuropsychological features were collected pre- and intraoperatively by care providers. Machine learning models' performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), with permutation testing for significance, and Shapley Additive Explanations to identify effective neuropsychological assessments. Results: Predicting POD before surgery with a random forest model achieved an AUC of 0.760. Incorporating all pre- and intraoperative features into the model yielded a slightly higher AUC of 0.783, with no statistically significant difference observed (P=.24). While cognitive factors alone were not strong predictors (AUC=0.617), specific tests within neuropsychological assessments, such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Trail Making Tests, showed high feature attribution and played a crucial role in further enhancing prediction before surgery. Conclusions: Preoperative risk prediction for POD can increase risk awareness in presurgical assessment and improve perioperative management in older patients at a high risk for 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AgingSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207