ArticleJAMA network open2025
Machine Learning Multimodal Model for Delirium Risk Stratification.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning models for predicting postoperative delirium after noncardiac surgery: A comparative study.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Article
- Application of supervised machine learning algorithms to predict in-hospital death risk in patients receiving intra-aortic balloon pump therapy during the perioperative period of cardiac surgery.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Empowered Multimodal Learning in Psychiatry: A Scoping Review.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2026Review
- Machine learning and artificial intelligence for delirium prediction with Electronic Health Records (EHR): a scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Gene4Denovo2: an updated platform for human de novo mutations discovery and interpretation.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Reframing Person-Centered Fundamental Care in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Posthumanization: A Theory-Informed Narrative Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Delirium prevalence, diagnostic uncertainty and outcomes in ORCHARD-EPR: validation against prospective reference cohorts.Age and ageing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Automating the identification of risk for developing hospital delirium with models that use machine learning (ML) could facilitate more rapid prevention, identification, and treatment of delirium. However, there are very few reports on the performance of ML models for delirium risk stratification in live clinical practice. Objective: To report on development, operationalization, and validation of a multimodal ML model for delirium risk stratification in live clinical practice and its associations with workflow and clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study developed an ML model supported by automated electronic medical records to stratify the risk of non-intensive care unit delirium in live clinical practice using the Confusion Assessment Method as the diagnostic reference standard, with an iterative model update method. Data from patients aged at least 60 years admitted to non-intensive care units at Mount Sinai Hospital between January 2016 and January 2020 were used to train and test the ML model presented. The model was validated in live clinical practice from March 2023 to March 2024. Analysis of the model's associations with workflow and clinical outcomes was conducted retrospectively in 2024, comparing hospitalized patients prior to deployment of any model version (pre-ML cohort) and during model clinical deployment (post-ML cohort). Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, monthly delirium detection rates, median length of hospital stay, and daily doses of opiate, benzodiazepine, and antipsychotic medications administered. Results: The overall sample included 32 284 inpatient admissions (mean [SD] age, 73.56 (9.67) years, 15 157 [46.9%] women). A total of 25 261 inpatient admissions of older patients with both medical and surgical primary diagnoses represented the combined model testing and training cohort (median age, 73.37 [66.42-81.36] years) and live clinical deployment validation cohort (median [IQR] age, 72.11 [62.26-78.97] years), while 7023 inpatient admissions of older patients with both medical and surgical primary diagnoses represented the combined pre-ML (median [IQR] age, 74.00 [68.00-81.00] years) and post-ML (median [IQR] age, 75.33 [68.34-82.91] years) cohorts. The model presented is a fusion of electronic medical record patient data features and clinical note features processed by natural language processing. The results of model validation in live clinical practice included an area under the curve of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.93-0.95). Median (IQR) monthly delirium detection rates of inpatients assessed for delirium with the Confusion Assessment Method increased from 4.42% (95% CI, 3.70%-5.14%) in the pre-ML cohort to 17.17% (95% CI, 15.54%-18.80%) in the post-ML cohort (P < .001). Post-ML vs pre-ML cohorts received lower daily doses of benzodiazepines (median [IQR] 0.93 [0.42-2.28] diazepam dose equivalents vs 1.60 [0.66-4.27] diazepam dose equivalents; P < .001) and olanzapine (median [IQR], 1.09 [0.38-2.46] mg vs 2.50 [1.17-6.65] mg; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This quality improvement study demonstrates the feasibility of a novel multimodal ML model to automate delirium risk stratification in live clinical practice. The model demonstrated acceptable performance in live clinical practice and may facilitate resource allocation to enhance delirium identification and care.
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.