Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37853320›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2023

Documentation of cognitive impairment screening amongst older hospitalised Australians: a prospective clinical record audit.

Radhika Rice, Jamie Bryant, Rob Sanson Fisher

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07731334 (Prevalence of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in Patients Admitted to Non-neurological Rehabilitation Wards), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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.

NCT07731334 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Prevalence of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in Patients Admitted to Non-neurological Rehabilitation Wards

TypeinterventionalSponsorFondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi ETSRan2026 to 2028Enrolled384ConditionsMCI, Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), Mild Cognitive Impairment, Cognitive DeficitArmsCognitive and clinical screening, Extended neuropsychological assessment, Blood biomarker sampling and APOE genotyping, Non-contrast brain CT scan, Multimodal neurophysiological assessment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Observational
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Radhika RiceHunter New England Local Health District, Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
Jamie BryantSchool of Medicine and Public Health, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia. Jamie.Bryant@newcastle.edu.au.
Rob Sanson FisherSchool of Medicine and Public Health, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Hunter Medical Research Institute · AUHunter New England Local Health District · AUUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFailure to detect cognitive impairment (CI) in hospitalised older inpatients has serious medical and legal implications, including for the implementation of care planning. This mixed methods study aimed to determine amongst hospital in-patients aged ≥ 65 years: (1) Rates of documentation of screening for CI, including the factors associated with completion of screening; (2) Rates of undocumented CI amongst patients who had not received screening during their admission; (3) Healthcare provider practices and barriers related to CI screening.

methodsA mixed methods study incorporating a clinical audit and interviews with healthcare providers was conducted at one Australian public hospital. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 65 years and older and were admitted to a participating ward for a minimum of 48 h. Patient characteristics, whether CI screening had been documented, were extracted using a template. Patients who had not been screened for CI completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) to determine cognitive status. Interviews were conducted with healthcare providers to understand practices and barriers to screening for CI.

resultsOf the 165 patients included, 34.5% (n = 57) had screening for CI documented for their current admission. Patients aged > 85 years and those with two or more admissions had greater odds of having CI screening documented. Among patients without CI screening documented, 72% (n = 78) were identified as cognitively impaired. While healthcare providers agreed CI screening was beneficial, they identified lack of time and poor knowledge as barriers to undertaking screening.

conclusionsCI is frequently unrecognised in the hospital setting which is a missed opportunity for the provision of appropriate care. Future research should identify feasible and effective strategies to increase implementation of CI screening in hospitals.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionAustraliaClinical AuditDocumentationHospitals, PublicHumansProspective StudiesCognitive dysfunctionCognitive impairmentCognitive screeningOlder people

Identifiers

PMID37853320
PMCPMC10583351
OpenAlexW4387743021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.