Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40216453›Full record

ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2025

Prospective external validation of the automated PIPRA multivariable prediction model for postoperative delirium on real-world data from a consecutive cohort of non-cardiac surgery inpatients.

Kelly A Reeve, Nayeli Schmutz Gelsomino, Michela Venturini, Felix Buddeberg, Martin Zozman, Reto Stocker, Mary-Anne Kedda, Philipp Meier, Marius Möller, Simone Pascale Wildhaber and 1 more

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

11 authors.

Kelly A ReevePIPRA AG, Zurich, Switzerland.
Nayeli Schmutz GelsominoPIPRA AG, Zurich, Switzerland.
Michela VenturiniPIPRA AG, Zurich, Switzerland.
Felix BuddebergHirslanden Klinik Hirslanden, Zurich, Switzerland.
Martin ZozmanKusnacht Practice AG, Zurich Zollikon, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6096-0973
Reto StockerHirslanden Klinik Hirslanden, Zurich, Switzerland.
Mary-Anne KeddaPIPRA AG, Zurich, Switzerland.
Philipp MeierHirslanden Klinik Hirslanden, Zurich, Switzerland.
Marius MöllerHirslanden Klinik Hirslanden, Zurich, Switzerland.
Simone Pascale WildhaberHirslanden Klinik Hirslanden, Zurich, Switzerland.
Benjamin T DodsworthPIPRA AG, Zurich, Switzerland ben@pipra.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7908-7855

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPostoperative delirium (POD) is a common complication in surgical patients over 60, increasing morbidity, mortality and hospital stays. While international guidelines recommend risk screening, resource constraints limit implementation. This study externally validated the Pre-Interventional Preventive Risk Assessment (PIPRA) algorithm, a CE-certified tool for identifying high-risk patients to enable targeted prevention.

methodsA prospective validation study was conducted at a 335-bed Swiss hospital as part of a quality improvement initiative. Data from 866 patients aged ≥60 undergoing non-cardiac, non-intracranial surgery (May-June 2023) were analysed. The PIPRA model's performance was assessed on discrimination (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUROC)) and calibration.

resultsPOD occurred in 11.5% (n=100) of patients. The PIPRA model showed good discrimination (AUROC=0.77, 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.82) and generally accurate calibration, though slightly overpredicting risk in high-risk patients. POD was associated with higher mortality, prolonged intensive care unit (ICU)/hospital stays and increased nursing care needs. The model effectively stratified patients for targeted interventions. DISCUSSION: The PIPRA algorithm demonstrated robust performance in a real-world setting, affirming its utility for POD risk prediction. The study highlighted the model's applicability across diverse clinical environments, despite differences in patient populations and screening protocols.

conclusionsThe PIPRA algorithm is a reliable tool for identifying surgical patients at risk of POD, supporting early intervention strategies to improve patient outcomes. Its integration into clinical workflows may enhance POD prevention efforts and optimise resource allocation in perioperative care.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDeliriumPostoperative ComplicationsAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansInpatientsMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentSwitzerlandArtificial intelligenceDecision Support Systems, ClinicalElectronic Health RecordsMachine LearningNursing

Identifiers

PMID40216453
PMCPMC11987130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.