Observational studyGeroScience2024
Neurological diagnostic tests for patients with and without delirium: a prospective observational study.
Observational study in GeroScience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since most of the precipitating factors of delirium are not due to neurological disorders, neurological diagnostic tests (NDTs) may be of limited value. We hypothesized that delirium has a high burden of NDTs with a low diagnostic yield. All patients admitted to the internal medicine wards of a single secondary teaching hospital between November 2019 and January 2020 were eligible. Within the first 48 h of their admission, they had a formal evaluation by a neuropsychologist to screen for presence of delirium. NDTs (brain MRI, brain CT, electroencephalography (EEG), and lumbar puncture) performed during the hospital stay were compared between patients with and without delirium using a logistic regression model stratified by a propensity score. The proportions of diagnostic yield (acute anomalies that changed the treatment management) provided by each type of examination were compared. Of 217 patients included, 19/32 patients (61%) with delirium had one or more NDTs, compared to 48/185 (26%) without delirium (adjusted OR 2.7; 95%CI 1.1-6.7; p = 0.027). The proportions of NDT results affecting management for patients with and without delirium were 13 and 20% for brain CT scans (p = 0.71), 29 and 38% for brain MRI (p = 0.99), and 20 and 10% for EEGs (p = 0.99), respectively. The higher proportion of NDTs performed on patients with delirium was associated with a low diagnostic yield, although not statistically different from those performed among inpatients without delirium. There is a need for restrictive, evidence-based guidelines to help with the work-up for patients with delirium.
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.