Evidence mapPaperPMID 40489772Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2025

Prediction Models for Postoperative Delirium of Cardiovascular Surgery (PODOCVS): Protocol for a Systematic Review.

Xuling Zhao, Yike Wang, Liju Li, Meijuan Lan, Xiaodi He

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Xuling Zhao *Zhejiang Taizhou Hospital, Linhai, China.ORCID 0009-0006-9723-5819
Yike Wang *The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.ORCID 0009-0001-8141-2802
Liju LiZhejiang Taizhou Hospital, Linhai, China.ORCID 0009-0003-0669-5958
Meijuan LanThe Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9601-4068
Xiaodi HeThe Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.ORCID 0009-0009-9747-204X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPostoperative delirium of cardiovascular surgery (PODOCVS) is an acute brain dysfunction characterized by inattention, impaired consciousness, and cognitive disorders, and the severity and presence of these symptoms fluctuate over time. PODOCVS occurs during the early postoperative period and is associated with adverse outcomes, including prolonged mechanical ventilation, premature mortality, and so on. Advances in its early diagnosis and treatment have mitigated some of the initial adverse effects of PODOCVS, but models for predicting risk in patients who have already developed PODOCVS remain inadequate for effective secondary prevention. Developing multivariable prediction models for stratifying PODOCVS risk would enable early, personalized interventions.

objectiveThis study aims to systematically review and critically evaluate the development, performance, and applicability of existing prediction models for PODOCVS.

methodsAn extensive systematic search will be performed across multiple databases, including Embase, PubMed, the Web of Science, and so on, to identify studies related to multivariate predictive models for PODOCVS. A manual search of the included studies' reference lists will also be conducted to identify any additional relevant publications. This systematic review will include studies that meet the following criteria: (1) studies with subject populations comprising adult cardiovascular surgery patients aged ≥18 years, (2) studies involving the development and internal or external validation of predictive models for PODOCVS via multivariate analysis, and (3) studies with outcome measures focused on postoperative delirium. Two researchers (ZXL and WYK) will independently extract the data and assess the included studies' model quality using the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) checklist and the Predictive Model Bias Risk Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Since this study will not involve patient data, ethics approval is not required. Our findings will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and the dataset will be made freely available.

resultsLiterature searches were conducted from the inception of the database to May 20, 2024 (updated up to January 31, 2025), and data extraction and analysis are expected to be complete by the end of May 2025. We currently have a preliminary plan to publish the complete study results by August 2025, subject to any unforeseen delays or changes in the research timeline.

conclusionsWe present a protocol for the systematic review of prediction models for postoperative delirium in cardiac surgery patients. Aiming to identify, summarize, and critically appraise existing risk models globally, this review seeks to provide an up-to-date reference for stakeholders involved in patients with cardiac surgery care, policy making, and research. In addition, we aim to investigate whether machine learning models for PODOCVS offer more accurate predictions than traditional statistical models.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42024578957; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024578957. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/75368.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular Surgical ProceduresDeliriumPostoperative ComplicationsHumansResearch DesignRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSystematic Reviews as Topicacute brain dysfunctioncardiovascular surgerymachine learningpostoperative deliriumprediction modelssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40489772
PMCPMC12186001

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.