Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30646122›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2018

Performance of Electronic Prediction Rules for Prevalent Delirium at Hospital Admission.

Christopher W Halladay, Andrea Yevchak Sillner, James L Rudolph

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Can Variables From the Electronic Health Record Identify Delirium at Bedside?Journal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Delirium in Intensive Care.Current anesthesiology reports · 2021
    Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher W HalladayCenter of Innovation in Long Term Services and Supports, Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Providence, Rhode Island.
Andrea Yevchak SillnerCollege of Nursing, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
James L RudolphCenter of Innovation in Long Term Services and Supports, Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Providence, Rhode Island.
Providence VA Medical Center · USPennsylvania State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Delirium at admission is associated with increased hospital morbidity and mortality, but it may be missed in up to 70% of cases. Use of a predictive algorithm in an electronic medical record (EMR) system could provide critical information to target assessment of those with delirium at admission. Objectives: To develop and assess a prediction rule for delirium using 2 populations of veterans and compare this rule with previously confirmed rules. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a diagnostic study, randomly selected EMRs of hospitalized veterans from the Veterans Affairs (VA) External Peer Review Program at 118 VA medical centers with inpatient facilities were reviewed for delirium risk factors associated with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) delirium rule in a derivation cohort (October 1, 2012, to September 30, 2013) and a confirmation cohort (October 1, 2013, to March 31, 2014). Delirium within 24 hours of admission was identified using key word terms. A total of 39 377 veterans 65 years or older who were admitted to a VA medical center for congestive heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, community-acquired pneumonia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were included in the study. Exposure: The EMR calculated delirium risk. Main Outcomes and Measures: Delirium at admission as identified by trained nurse reviewers was the main outcome measure. Random forest methods were used to identify accurate risk factors for prevalent delirium. A prediction rule for prevalent delirium was developed, and its diagnostic accuracy was tested in the confirmation cohort. This consolidated NICE rule was compared with previously confirmed scoring algorithms (electronic NICE and Pendlebury NICE). Results: A total of 27 625 patients were included in the derivation cohort (28 118 [92.2%] male; mean [SD] age, 75.95 [8.61] years) and 11 752 in the confirmation cohort (11 536 [98.2%] male; mean [SD] age, 75.43 [8.55] years). Delirium at admission was identified in 2343 patients (8.5%) in the derivation cohort and 882 patients (7.0%) in the confirmation cohort. Modeling techniques identified cognitive impairment, infection, sodium level, and age of 80 years or older as the dominant risk factors. The consolidated NICE rule (area under the receiver operating characteristic [AUROC] curve, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.91-0.92; P < .001) had significantly higher discriminatory function than the eNICE rule (AUROC curve, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.80-0.82; P < .001) or Pendlebury NICE rule (AUROC curve, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.86-0.88; P < .001). These findings were confirmed in the confirmation cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: This analysis identified preexisting cognitive impairment, infection, sodium level, and age of 80 years or older as delirium screening targets. Use of this algorithm in an EMR system could direct clinical assessment efforts to patients with delirium at admission.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsPatient AdmissionAgedAged, 80 and overDeliriumFemaleForecastingHumansMalePractice Guidelines as TopicPrevalenceRetrospective StudiesRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID30646122
PMCPMC6324279
OpenAlexW2888424845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.