ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2025
The predictive value comparison of the different nutritional assessment tools for postoperative delirium in elderly patients after non-cardiac surgery.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2025. 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
Objective: This study aims to evaluate and compare the predictive performance of various nutritional assessment tools. Methods: This prospective observational study enrolled 315 elderly patients (≥65 years) scheduled for non-cardiac surgery at Shanxi Medical University First Hospital between March and May 2025. Preoperative data collected included demographics, laboratory indices, Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI), Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), and Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). Postoperative delirium (POD) was diagnosed daily during the 7 days postoperatively using the 3-Minute Diagnostic Confusion Assessment Method (3D-CAM). Patients were stratified into Delirium ( Results: MNA and PNI scores were significantly lower in the delirium group compared to the non-delirium group ( Conclusion: MNA is the most effective standalone nutritional tool for predicting POD in elderly non-cardiac surgery patients. A combined model incorporating age, CRP, and MNA score (AUC = 0.810) shows higher accuracy and improved clinical usefulness for preoperative risk stratification. This allows targeted interventions for high-risk individuals.
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.