SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2026
The Predictive Value of Machine Learning for Postoperative Delirium in Cardiac Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a predictive model for postoperative delirium in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Postoperative delirium (POD) following cardiac surgery is a severe complication, and early identification of delirium risk remains a challenge in clinical practice. While machine learning (ML) has garnered increasing attention in health care applications, effective early prediction tools remain limited in current clinical practice. Recent investigations have explored the effectiveness of ML-based methods for identifying the risk of POD in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. However, more evidence is required to validate the feasibility of these methods. objectives: This study aims to ascertain the performance of ML in identifying the risk of POD following cardiac surgery, providing evidence for the development or updating of future ML-based assessment tools. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across 4 databases-PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science-through August 30, 2024, to identify studies investigating individual POD risk prediction using ML approaches and nomograms. The risk of bias of the models in the included studies was assessed leveraging the Prediction Model Bias Risk Assessment Tool. Subgroup analyses were performed based on datasets, validation methods, study types, risk of bias, and model types. Results: The analysis incorporated 28 original studies comprising 80,143 patients undergoing cardiac surgery, of whom 6326 developed POD. Meta-analysis revealed that, in validation datasets, the c-index, sensitivity, and specificity for delirium prediction reached 0.805 (95% CI 0.759-0.852), 0.72 (95% CI 0.65-0.79), and 0.78 (95% CI 0.71-0.83), respectively. Logistic regression was the primary modeling method. In validation datasets, the c-index, sensitivity, and specificity reached 0.773 (95% CI 0.724-0.823), 0.73 (95% CI 0.64-0.80), and 0.70 (95% CI 0.65-0.74), respectively. Conclusions: ML-based prediction tools for POD following cardiac surgery demonstrate promising performance. However, the limited number of studies and validation approaches necessitate cautious interpretation of these findings. Future multicenter studies are warranted to develop more robust ML-based prediction tools, enabling precise risk stratification and targeted preventive interventions for POD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.