ArticleAustralasian journal on ageing2024
Development of a minimum clinical dataset for preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment using a modified Delphi technique.
Article in Australasian journal on ageing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of a minimum clinical dataset for preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment using a modified Delphi technique.Australasian journal on ageing · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo construct a standardised, consensus-guided minimum clinical dataset (MCDS) for preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment and optimisation (CGA) in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.
methodsWe conducted a review of the international perioperative literature to identify CGA domains and tools for potential inclusion in the MCDS. We invited members of the Australian and New Zealand Society for Geriatric Medicine to participate in a Delphi study to obtain consensus on MCDS tools. Participants were asked to rate proposed tools using Likert scales (when >2 tools) or make a binary choice between two proposed tools. Consensus was considered to be achieved when there was at least 75% concordance between the two rounds amongst the participants, and at least one variable attaining over 50% of participants' votes. Domains that did not achieve consensus in Round 1 were carried over to Round 2.
resultsThere were 73 participants in Round 1 of the Delphi study and 47 participants in Round 2. Consensus was achieved on tool/s recommended for every MCDS domain: Clinical Frailty Scale (frailty); sMMSE, RUDAS, MoCA (cognition); 4AT (delirium); timed-up-and-go (physical function); GDS-15 (mood); Barthel Index (functional status); and MUST (malnutrition).
conclusionsWe recommend clinicians delivering preoperative CGA consider the use of the MCDS we have constructed when assessing older people contemplating surgery, as part of a multicomponent and multidisciplinary approach to optimising perioperative outcomes.
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.