ArticleBMJ open2025
Content validity, practicality and testing of the reliability of various tools for the detection and screening of delirium in residents with dementia in German nursing homes: a study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough individuals with dementia who reside in nursing homes are particularly susceptible to developing delirium, this condition is rarely recognised in these settings. Detection of delirium requires validated and reliable tools for this setting that can be applied by nursing staff. The primary objective of the study is to assess the comprehensibility, practicality and inter-rater reliability of two delirium detection tools (4 A's test (4AT) and 4-item delirium superimposed on dementia (4-DSD)) and one tool for assessing both the diagnosis and severity of delirium (Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R-98)) in people with dementia who reside in nursing homes when used by nurses. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The comprehensibility and practicality of the German versions of the 4AT, 4-DSD and DRS-R-98 will be evaluated using cognitive interviews in accordance with the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments framework. On the basis of the results of the cognitive interviews, a manual for each of the three tools will be developed and finalised by an expert panel. Finally, the inter-rater reliability and measurement error of the three tools will be determined using the manuals. For this purpose, a total of 70 residents from six nursing homes will be assessed by at least two nurses. The data analysis will include descriptive statistics and inter-rater reliability assessment for individual items (kappa value) and total scores (Intraclass correlation coefficients). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will assess the comprehensibility, practicality and inter-rater reliability of the 4AT, 4-DSD and DRS-R-98 for use in residents with dementia in nursing homes. The project was approved by the medical ethics committee of the University of Oldenburg (reference number: 2025-093). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The inter-rater reliability study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register. REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00037458 (https://www.drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00037458/details).
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.