ArticleEuropean geriatric medicine2026
Comparing three approaches to delirium identification in older patients presenting to the emergency department.
Article in European geriatric medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEarly identification of hospitalised patients with or at risk for delirium is important to treat patients adequately. The aim of this study is to compare three approaches to delirium identification for identifying patients being at risk for or with a delirium during hospitalisation in a cohort of older patients presenting to the emergency department, including retrospectively extracted indicators of delirium based on prehospital care notes, by risk assessment (VMS), and screening instrument (4AT).
methodsA single-centre cohort study was conducted with the use of data from patients 70 years and older from Acutelines, a hospital-based biobank. extended with extraction of documented prehospital indicators based on prehospital care notes and a hospital chart-based review as a reference standard to determine whether patients experienced delirium during hospitalisation. We compared the different approaches by calculating standard performance measures (e.g. sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values).
resultsData of 655 patients were included. Median age was 76 years, and 407 (62%) were male. During hospitalisation, 146 patients (22%) were identified as having a delirium. The positive likelihood ratios were 5.54 for the documented prehospital indicators, 1.55 for the VMS risk assessment, and 2.39 for the 4AT screening.
conclusionAll three approaches, the documented prehospital indicators, the VMS risk assessment, and 4AT screening, are associated with delirium during hospitalisation. The documented prehospital indicators could be of added value, and we see this as a starting point for research into how the prehospital information could be used in the acute care pathway for older patients with or at risk for delirium.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42832155What 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.