ArticleAge and ageing2025
Using scores from the 4AT delirium detection tool as an indicator of possible dementia: a study of 75 221 older adult hospital admissions.
Article in Age and ageing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic test accuracy of screening tools for the detection of neurocognitive disorders in older adults post-trauma in acute care settings: a systematic review.European geriatric medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Delirium: more than a marker of baseline vulnerability.Age and ageing · 2026Article
- Postoperative outcomes in older patients with postoperative delirium in the UK: SNAP-3, a snapshot observational study.British journal of anaesthesia · 2026Observational
- Prevalence of cognitive morbidity including delirium in 51,202 emergency hospital admissions across 29 medical and surgical specialties in ORCHARD-EPR: a cross-sectional study.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOverall dementia diagnosis rates are substantially below true rates. Hospital admissions of older people involve cognitive and functional assessments relevant to dementia diagnosis. These assessments could be harnessed to contribute to identifying patients for further assessment. Yet relationships of inpatient cognitive tests with known dementia are unclear. The 4AT (www.the4AT.com) assesses for delirium (Scores 4-12) and also cognitive impairment via embedded cognitive tests (Scores 1-3). We investigated relationships between 4AT scores and clinical dementia diagnoses.
methodsWe included participants aged ≥65 years admitted as a medical emergency to three hospitals from 4 January 2016 to 4 January 2020, who had the 4AT performed on admission. Clinical dementia diagnosis was ascertained from linked primary care, hospital discharge and community prescribing data.
resultsOf 75 221 admissions, 62 188 (82.7%; 33 625 unique patients; mean age 80.2 years; 55.8% female) had a 4AT on admission. Of these, 9948 (16.0%) had a recorded clinical dementia diagnosis at the time of admission, with a further 1197 (1.9%) receiving a new diagnosis at discharge. Of admissions with dementia, 9669/11 145 (86.8%) had a 4AT score ≥1 on admission, compared to 14 994/51 043 (29.4%) without dementia.4AT ≥1 had a sensitivity of 0.87 (95% CI 0.86-0.87) and a specificity of 0.71 (0.70-0.71) in relation to clinical dementia diagnosis. 4AT ≥4 showed sensitivity of 0.50 (0.50-0.51) and a specificity of 0.88 (0.88-0.88).
conclusions4AT scores were associated with clinically diagnosed dementia. These results suggest that routinely collected 4AT scores could be leveraged in conjunction with other clinical indicators to identify patients with possible undiagnosed dementia who could undergo further inpatient diagnostic assessment and/or post-discharge specialist follow-up.
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.