ArticleScientific reports2026
Translating predictive models into clinical practice: fast-and-frugal trees for postoperative delirium using routine data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Postoperative delirium (POD) is a frequent and serious complication associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Although predictive models for POD exist, they are rarely implemented in routine clinical practice, partly due to their complexity and data requirements. Simple and interpretable tools based on routinely available data may improve clinical applicability. In this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated Fast-and-Frugal Trees (FFTrees) for predicting POD using routine electronic health record data from 61,150 surgical patients treated between 2017 and 2020 at a large German university hospital. We assessed the transferability of previously developed FFTrees and compared their performance with logistic regression, classification and regression trees, random forests, and support vector machines. Updated FFTrees were derived for pre- and peri-operative prediction. Previously published FFTrees showed reduced performance in routine data but improved after recalibration. Updated FFTrees achieved balanced accuracies of 58% (pre-operative) and 60% (peri-operative), with performance comparable to more complex models. Although predictive accuracy was moderate across all models, FFTrees offer advantages in simplicity, transparency, and ease of implementation. As easily memorized decision rules, they can help clinicians organize familiar cues in an optimal order, supporting delirium risk assessment in routine practice where more complex tools are rarely used.
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.