Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38847070›Full record

SynthesisAcademic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine2024

Risk factors and risk stratification approaches for delirium screening: A Geriatric Emergency Department Guidelines 2.0 systematic review.

Justine Seidenfeld, Sangil Lee, Luna Ragsdale, Christian H Nickel, Shan W Liu, Maura Kennedy

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Screening and Interventions for Elder Mistreatment: Geriatric Emergency Department Guidelines 2.0 Systematic Review.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. 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.

Justine SeidenfeldCenter of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation (ADAPT), Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6912-7315
Sangil LeeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Luna RagsdaleDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Christian H NickelEmergency Department, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Shan W LiuDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5602-3717
Maura KennedyDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

HSRD VA IK2 HX003673John A. Hartford FoundationU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs IK2HX003673West Health Institute
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAs part of the Geriatric Emergency Department (ED) Guidelines 2.0 project, we conducted a systematic review to find risk factors or risk stratification approaches that can be used to identify subsets of older adults who may benefit from targeted ED delirium screening.

methodsAn electronic search strategy was developed with a medical librarian, conducted in April 2021 and November 2022. Full-text studies of patients ≥65 years assessed for prevalent delirium in the ED were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the McMaster University Clarity Group tool. Outcomes measures pertained to the risk stratification method used. Due to heterogeneity of patient populations, risk stratification methods, and outcomes, a meta-analysis was not conducted.

resultsOur search yielded 1878 unique citations, of which 13 were included. Six studies developed a novel delirium risk score with or without evaluation of specific risk factors, six studies evaluated specific risk factors only, and one study evaluated an existing nondelirium risk score for association with delirium. The most common risk factor was history of dementia, with odds ratios ranging from 3.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-8.9) to 18.33 (95% CI 8.08-43.64). Other risk factors that were consistently associated with increased risk of delirium included older age, use of certain medications (such as antipsychotics, antidepressants, and opioids, among others), and functional impairments. Of the studies that developed novel risk scores, the reported area under the curve ranged from 0.77 to 0.90. Only two studies reported potential impact of the risk stratification tool on screening burden.

conclusionsThere is significant heterogeneity, but results suggest that factors such as dementia, age over 75, and functional impairments should be used to identify older adults who are at highest risk for ED delirium. No studies evaluated implementation of a risk stratification method for delirium screening or evaluated patient-oriented outcomes.

Indexed as

DeliriumEmergency Service, HospitalMass ScreeningAgedAged, 80 and overGeriatric AssessmentHumansRisk AssessmentRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID38847070
PMCPMC13067614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.