Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32043769›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2020

Validity and Reliability of the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale-Thai Version (MDAS-T) for Assessment of Delirium in Palliative Care Patients.

Watanachai Klankluang, Panate Pukrittayakamee, Wanlop Atsariyasing, Arunotai Siriussawakul, Pratamaporn Chanthong, Sasima Tongsai, Supakarn Tayjasanant

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Delirium severity trajectories and survival outcome in palliative care patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. The prevalence, associated factors, clinical impact, and state of diagnosis of delirium in palliative care patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Watanachai KlankluangSiriraj Palliative Care Center, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Panate PukrittayakameeDepartment Psychiatry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Wanlop AtsariyasingDepartment Psychiatry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Arunotai SiriussawakulDepartment Anesthesiology, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pratamaporn ChanthongSiriraj Palliative Care Center, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sasima TongsaiDepartment Office for Research and Development, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Supakarn TayjasanantSiriraj Palliative Care Center, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0001-5320-6457
Mahidol University · THSiriraj Hospital · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDelirium, a neuropsychiatric syndrome that occurs throughout medical illness trajectories, is frequently misdiagnosed. The Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) is a commonly used tool in palliative care (PC) settings. Our objective was to establish and validate the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale-Thai version (MDAS-T) in PC patients. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe MDAS was translated into Thai. Content validity, inter-rater reliability, and internal consistency were explored. The construct validity of the MDAS-T was analyzed using exploratory factor analysis. Instrument testing of the MDAS-T, the Thai version of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU-T), and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition as the gold standard was performed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the optimal cutoff score. The duration of each assessment was recorded.

resultsThe study enrolled 194 patients. The content validity index was 0.97. The intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach's α coefficient were 0.98 and 0.96, respectively. A principal component analysis indicated a homogeneous, one-factor structure. The area under the ROC curve was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-0.99). The best combination of sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) of the MDAS-T were 0.92 (0.85-0.96) and 0.90 (0.82-0.94), respectively, with a cutoff score of 9, whereas the CAM-ICU-T yielded 0.58 (0.48-0.67) and 0.98 (0.93-0.99), respectively. The median MDAS-T assessment time was 5 minutes.

conclusionThis study established and validated the MDAS-T as a good and feasible tool for delirium screening and severity rating in PC settings. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Delirium is prevalent in palliative care (PC) settings and causes distress to patients and families, thereby making delirium screening necessary. This study found that the MDAS-T is a highly objective and feasible test for delirium screening and severity monitoring in PC settings and can greatly improve the quality of care for this population.

Indexed as

DeliriumPalliative CareHumansReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityThailandDeliriumMDASPalliative careScreeningSensitivity and specificityValidity and reliability

Identifiers

PMID32043769
PMCPMC7011635
OpenAlexW2988910087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.