Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34383103›Full record

ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2022

[Pitfalls in the diagnosis of delirium].

Peter Nydahl, Ulf Günther, Hans-Christian Hansen, Johannes Meyne, Jürgen Osterbrink, Nils G Margraf

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. [Delirium in stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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

6 authors.

Peter NydahlPflegeforschung, Abteilung für Anästhesiologie und operative Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Brunswiker Str. 10, 24105, Kiel, Deutschland. peter.nydahl@uksh.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5178-0364
Ulf GüntherUniversitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin, Schmerztherapie, Klinikum Oldenburg AöR, Oldenburg, Deutschland.
Hans-Christian HansenKlinik für Neurologie, Friedrich-Ebert-Krankenhaus GmbH Neumünster/Universität Hamburg, Neumünster, Deutschland.
Johannes MeyneKlinik für Neurologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Deutschland.
Jürgen OsterbrinkInstitut für Pflegewissenschaft und -praxis, Paracelsus Medizinische Privatuniversität, Salzburg, Österreich.
Nils G MargrafKlinik für Neurologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe diagnosis of delirium is challenging and requires precise definitions in both clinical routine and in studies.

aimTo point out various pitfalls in the clinical diagnosis of delirium and discuss solutions.

methodsReview.

resultsCommon problems include (a) clinical judgment of staff vs. the use of valid assessment tools, (b) different lists of criteria for delirium that may consider the symptoms of delirium differently and thus lead to inclusion or exclusion of patients, (c) different assessment tools that test the symptoms of delirium to different extents and thus have different accuracy, (d) patients with limited communication abilities, such as aphasia, where common tests often fail and alternative procedures may be more effective; (e) the decision whether to test delirium once, twice, three times, or more frequently in 24 h has consequences on the incidence and duration of delirium, (f) the end of delirium, often defined retrospectively as a delirium-free interval or prospectively as the time of transfer or occurrence of an exclusion criterion, can lead to considerable measurement inaccuracies.

conclusionsAlthough not all problems can be definitively answered, transparent definition, performance, and documentation of diagnostic procedures are recommended.

Indexed as

Retrospective StudiesHumansIncidenceDiagnosisEncephalopathyResearchSymptom assessment

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.