ArticleBMC geriatrics2022
Comparing emergency department use among individuals with varying levels of cognitive impairment.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of interventions for persons living with dementia: The Geriatric ED Guidelines 2.0.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Presenting complaints and emergency triage priority of older adults hospitalized with delirium: a retrospective cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Overall and Avoidable Healthcare Utilization among Heterogeneous Hispanic/Latino Ethnic Groups with Cognitive Impairment in the Study of Latinos-Investigation of Neurocognitive Aging (SOL-INCA).Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Article
- Incremental Healthcare Costs of Dementia and Cognitive Impairment in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Prospective Cohort Study.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2025Article
- Harnessing team science in dementia research: Insights from the Alzheimer's disease research group in South Carolina.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAs the population ages, Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) are becoming increasingly common in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). This study compares the frequency of ED use among a cohort of individuals with well-defined cognitive performance (cognitively intact, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and ADRD).
methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of English-speaking, community-dwelling individuals evaluated at four health system-based multidisciplinary memory clinics from 2014-2016. We obtained demographic and clinical data, including neuropsychological testing results, through chart review and linkage to electronic health record data. We characterized the frequency and quantity of ED use within one year (6 months before and after) of cognitive evaluation and compared ED use between the three groups using bivariate and multivariate approaches.
resultsOf the 779 eligible patients, 89 were diagnosed as cognitively intact, 372 as MCI, and 318 as ADRD. The proportion of subjects with any annual ED use did not increase significantly with greater cognitive impairment: cognitively intact (16.9%), MCI (26.1%), and ADRD (28.9%) (p = 0.072). Average number of ED visits increased similarly: cognitively intact (0.27, SD 0.72), MCI (0.41, SD 0.91), and ADRD (0.55, SD 1.25) (p = 0.059). Multivariate logistic regression results showed that patients with MCI (odds ratio (OR) 1.62; CI = 0.87-3.00) and ADRD (OR 1.84; CI = 0.98-3.46) did not significantly differ from cognitively intact adults in any ED use. Multivariate negative binomial regression found patients with MCI (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.38; CI = 0.79-2.41) and ADRD (IRR 1.76, CI = 1.00-3.10) had elevated but non-significant risk of an ED visit compared to cognitively intact individuals.
conclusionThough there was no significant difference in ED use in this small sample from one health system, our estimates are comparable to other published work. Results suggested a trend towards higher utilization among adults with MCI or ADRD compared to those who were cognitively intact. We must confirm our findings in other settings to better understand how to optimize systems of acute illness care for individuals with MCI and ADRD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.