MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417434634 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000006997

Association Between Acute Kidney Injury, Delirium, and Outcomes in Patients With Critical Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· review· en· W4417434634 on OpenAlexaff
Prit Kusirisin, Janice Y. Kung, Oleksa Rewa, M. Elizabeth Wilcox, Sean M. Bagshaw

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliriumCritically illAcute kidney injuryCritical illnessAssociation (psychology)MEDLINEKidney disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Acute kidney injury (AKI) and delirium are common complications of critical illness. However, relatively few studies have evaluated their relationship. We conducted a systematic synthesis and meta-analysis of existing evidence to clarify this association in critically ill patients. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search was conducted across MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for publications reporting both AKI and delirium in ICUs patients from January 2000 to January 2025. STUDY SELECTION: AKI was defined according to serum creatinine or urine output criteria based on the contemporary definitions used in the individual studies. The primary outcome was the proportion of critically ill patients with AKI who developed delirium. Secondary outcomes included mortality and health service utilization. DATA EXTRACTION: Pooled meta-analyses were summarized as effect sizes in proportions, risk ratios (RRs), odds ratios, or weighted mean differences (WMDs) using a random-effects model. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eighteen observational studies comprising 158,694 patients were included. Overall study quality was moderate. The pooled proportion of delirium among patients with AKI was 32% (95% CI, 18-47%). Delirium was associated with higher mortality (RR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.61-3.47; moderate certainty), greater renal replacement therapy use (RR, 3.12; 95% CI, 1.89-5.15; moderate certainty), longer ICU stays (WMD, 3.54 d; 95% CI, 1.20-5.87 d; moderate certainty), and longer hospital stays (WMD, 4.78 d; 95% CI, 3.48-6.09 d; moderate certainty) compared with patients with AKI not experiencing delirium. CONCLUSIONS: Delirium is common among critically ill patients with AKI and is associated with worse outcomes and greater health resource use.

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)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0230.045
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207