MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415647843 · doi:10.1111/jan.70302

Prevention and Early Delirium Identification Carer Toolkit ( <scp>PREDICT</scp> ): A Study Protocol for a Stepped‐Wedge, Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4415647843 on OpenAlexaff
Christina Aggar, Kasia Bail, Carla Sunner, Golam Sorwar, Mark Hughes, Andrea Taylor, Roslyn M. Compton, James Baker, Jennene Greenhill, Andrew Tri Van Ho, Alison Craswell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Health and Medical Research Council
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialDeliriumProtocol (science)Cluster (spacecraft)Cluster randomised controlled trialIdentification (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Delirium, a common, serious and often preventable complication in older hospitalised adults, contributes to significant health and social care costs. Carers are uniquely positioned to identify early signs and support delirium prevention. The Prevention & Early Delirium Identification Carer Toolkit (PREDICT), a novel model of care designed to educate carers about delirium management and prevention strategies, enables them to actively participate in the care and recovery of their person. Developed through a comprehensive literature review, a co-designed eDelphi and pilot study, PREDICT demonstrated acceptability and feasibility. AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness, implementation and cost-benefit of a PREDICT in hospital settings. METHOD: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial (SW-cRCT), consisting of a cohort study, healthcare service evaluation, and process evaluation. The study will assess carer and staff knowledge of delirium, carer care giving stress, health service outcomes (e.g., incidence, length of stay, readmissions) and cost-benefit. DISCUSSION: PREDICT is a scalable, person-centred approach that supports both patients and carers, with the potential to embed best-practice delirium management into routine healthcare. PUBLIC AND PATIENT INVOLVEMENT: This study was developed in consultation with older adults, carers and healthcare staff. Two consumer representatives joined the project steering committee and contributed to shaping the research question, refining the study protocol and selecting outcome measures relevant to families and healthcare staff. Carers were involved in reviewing participant information sheets and the PREDICT website, providing feedback to ensure clarity and accessibility. Results will be shared with participants and the wider community through plain-language summaries and public presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical trial: ACTRN12625000705482 registered on the 3rd of July 2025.

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)0.080
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0800.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.007
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0100.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0900.017

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 designRandomized trial
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 venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207