ArticleBMC medical education2025
Delirium education priorities for healthcare professional students: a modified Delphi study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A survey of medical student education in dementia and delirium in Europe.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Measuring unfinished nursing care in patients with or at risk for delirium: a development and Delphi study.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDelirium is frequently unrecognised, and healthcare professionals lack knowledge and confidence in recognition and management of the condition. Increased delirium education within pre-registration healthcare profession curricula may help to address this. A modified Delphi approach was utilised to develop a set of education priorities associated with delirium education for healthcare profession students.
methodsAn initial list of 72 education priorities were identified from a literature review, stakeholder focus groups, and a review of available clinical guidelines. Priorities were grouped into eight domains 'assessment and diagnosis', 'aetiology and risk factors', 'pathophysiology', 'treatment of delirium', 'prevention', 'delirium and dementia', 'impact on people with delirium, informal caregivers and family' and 'health promotion and public education'. Academic experts and healthcare professionals were invited to rank each priority and each domain across two rounds. Round one consisted of a survey including the list of 72 potential education priorities which participants were asked to rank from one (not a priority) to five (essential priority). Items which did not reach consensus criteria following round one were re-distributed as round two of the survey and participants were asked to repeat this exercise for the shorter list of items. Additionally, in round two, participants were asked to rank the eight domains from most important to least important.
resultsEighty participants completed round one of the Delphi survey and 55 (68.75%) also completed round two. Following round one, 41 priorities were considered highly relevant and therefore met the criteria to be included in the final set of education priorities. An additional four items reached these criteria following round two and so the final set consists of 45 items. Priorities related to prevention, diagnosis, and treatment were consistently ranked highly whereas priorities related to pathophysiology and health promotion were consistently ranked lowest. DISCUSSION: This Delphi study identified areas of education viewed as the highest priorities for healthcare profession students' delirium education, drawn from a range of academics and healthcare professionals. The final set may help to inform the development of delirium education reflecting these priorities.
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.