MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117234300 · doi:10.1002/alz70857_098242

Prevalence and trajectory of postoperative cognitive impairment in older surgical patients: a multicenter longitudinal prospective cohort study

2025· article· en· W7117234300 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tony Xing Tan, Ellene Yan, LEIF ERIK LOVBLOM, Frances Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalWomen's College HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionProspective cohort studyCognitive impairmentCohort studyLongitudinal studyCohortCognitive Assessment SystemMulticenter study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of remote healthcare services, including cognitive screening tools delivered through virtual platforms. This study evaluates the prevalence and trajectory of cognitive impairment (CI) in older non-cardiac surgical patients preoperatively and postoperatively at 30, 90, and 180 days, as assessed using remote cognitive assessment tools. METHOD: Following ethics approval, non-cardiac surgical patients aged ≥65 years provided consent. Cognition was assessed virtually and over the phone using two validated screening tools preoperatively and at 30, 90, and 180 days postoperatively: the Ascertain Dementia Eight-item Questionnaire (AD8) and Telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment (T-MoCA). Specifically, a cutoff score of ≥2 on the AD8 and ≤18 on the T-MoCA suggested CI. Participants identified as having probable CI on these screening tools were subsequently referred to as having CI. A total of 244 patients completed the AD8 and 218 completed the T-MoCA preoperatively and at least once postoperatively at 30, 90, or 180 days. RESULT: Among the 244 patients, the preoperative prevalence of CI on the AD8 was 17%, which did not change significantly after surgery (Figure 1A). Of the 202 participants without preoperative CI on the AD8, the incidence of CI was 8.3%, 6.4%, and 4.6% at 30, 90, and 180 days postoperatively, respectively (Figure 1B). In contrast to the AD8, the T-MoCA revealed a 26% prevalence of CI preoperatively, which significant decreased at 180 days (13% vs. 26%, p = 0.01; Figure 2A). Among participants without preoperative CI on the T-MoCA, a similar trend to AD8 was observed, with the postoperative incidence rates of CI being 11.1%, 7.8%, and 8.0% at 30, 90, and 180 days, respectively (Figure 2B). CONCLUSION: Regardless of the cognitive assessment tool, we found that participants without CI preoperatively experienced an increase in CI at 30 days postoperatively, followed by a decline at 90 and 180 days. Approximately 5% of patients developed CI on the AD8, and 8% on the T-MoCA at 6 months postoperatively. These findings highlight the potential impact of surgery on older adults with normal cognitive function and emphasize the value of remote cognitive screening tools in monitoring postoperative cognitive changes and identifying at-risk 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.288
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 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders→French-language works237,207→