Observational studyBMC anesthesiology2026
Risk prediction models based on machine learning for emergence delirium in elderly patients undergoing spine surgery: development and validation study.
Observational study in BMC anesthesiology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEmergence delirium (ED) is a common complication in elderly patients undergoing surgery for degenerative spinal disease (DSD) and is associated with adverse postoperative outcomes. Risk prediction may support perioperative risk stratification and individualized monitoring. This study aimed to develop a machine learning based model to predict ED risk in this population.
methodsThis single-center prospective observational cohort study enrolled 430 elderly patients with DSD undergoing spinal surgery at Shanghai Changzheng Hospital between January and October 2024 using convenience sampling. Eligible patients were screened and consented before surgery, and predictors were collected prospectively across five perioperative domains: patient characteristics, preoperative, intraoperative, anesthesia-related, and early postoperative factors. Emergence delirium was assessed as the outcome in the PACU. Feature selection was performed using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. Six machine learning (ML) models were developed and internally validated, and model interpretability was assessed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP).
resultsAmong 38 features examined, LASSO regression identified nine key predictors, including age, education level, postoperative pain, and midazolam exposure, among others. Among six ML models evaluated in the testing set, logistic regression achieved the best overall performance, with an area under the curve of 0.832, AUPRC of 0.693, accuracy of 0.769, specificity of 0.858, sensitivity of 0.610, F1-score of 0.650, and Brier score of 0.163. Global feature importance ranking was determined using the SHAP summary plot, showing that the most influential features were education, age, and Midazolam. Individual feature importance, as depicted by the SHAP beeswarm plot, indicated that intraoperative bleeding, operation duration, and age had the most significant impact on prediction. In addition, a potential synergistic pattern between operation duration and intraoperative blood loss indicated a synergistic increase in emergence delirium risk when both were elevated.
conclusionsAn interpretable logistic regression model showed acceptable overall performance for predicting emergence delirium risk in elderly patients undergoing spinal surgery. The model may support anesthesia-informed perioperative risk stratification and individualized monitoring; however, given its moderate sensitivity, it should be used as an adjunct to clinical judgment rather than as a stand-alone screening tool.
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.