Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40457744›Full record

Observational studyAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2025

Detection of emergency department patients at risk of dementia through artificial intelligence.

Inessa Cohen, Richard Andrew Taylor, Haipeng Xue, Isaac V Faustino, Natalia Festa, Cynthia Brandt, Emily Gao, Ling Han, Siddarth Khasnavis, James M Lai and 5 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Detection of emergency department patients at risk of dementia through artificial intelligence.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Inessa CohenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5807-2635
Richard Andrew TaylorDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Haipeng XueDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Isaac V FaustinoDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Natalia FestaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Cynthia BrandtDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Data Science, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Emily GaoDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Ling HanDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Siddarth KhasnavisDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
James M LaiDivision of Geriatric Medicine and Palliative Care, Department of Internal Medicine, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Adam P MeccaDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Atharva Vinay SapreDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Juan YoungDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Michael ZanchelliGeriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center, James J. Peters VAMC, Bronx, New York, USA.
Ula HwangGeriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center, James J. Peters VAMC, Bronx, New York, USA.

Funding

National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health P30AG073104 R03AG088893 P30AG021342
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe study aimed to develop and validate the Emergency Department Dementia Algorithm (EDDA) to detect dementia among older adults (65+) and support clinical decision-making in the emergency department (ED).

methodsIn a multisite retrospective study of 759,665 ED visits, electronic health record data from Yale New Haven Health (2014-2022) were used to train three supervised and semi-unsupervised positive-unlabeled machine learning models (XGBoost, Random Forest, LASSO). A separate test set of 400 ED encounters underwent adjudicated chart review for validation.

resultsEDDA achieved an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.85 in the test set and 0.93 in the validation set. Positive-unlabeled learning improved performance. Agreement between EDDA and clinician-adjudicated dementia diagnoses was moderate (kappa = 0.50), with 17% of EDDA-positive patients having undiagnosed probable dementia. DISCUSSION: EDDA enhances dementia detection in the ED, with potential for real-time implementation to improve patient outcomes and care transitions. HIGHLIGHTS: Developed a machine learning algorithm using electronic health record data to detect dementia in the emergency department (ED). Algorithm designed to balance detection accuracy with ease of ED implementation. Parsimonious model with limited but predictive variables selected for rapid ED use. Focused on real-time application, optimizing ED workflows, and clinician support. Aims to enhance ED dementia detection, patient safety, and care coordination.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDementiaEmergency Service, HospitalMachine LearningAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsClinical Decision-MakingElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective Studiescare transition interventioncognitive impairmentdementiaearly dementia detectionemergency department

Identifiers

PMID40457744
PMCPMC12130574

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.