ArticleDelirium (Bielefeld, Germany)2026
Postoperative Delirium: A Survey of Perceptions Among Surgical Providers.
Article in Delirium (Bielefeld, Germany), 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
Abstract
Background: Postoperative delirium (POD) remains a significant, costly complication. Despite increasing awareness in medical specialties, understanding among surgical providers remains unknown. Objectives: We aimed to (1) understand surgical providers' self-perceived knowledge of and confidence in identifying and managing POD, and (2) define the perceived importance of POD among surgical providers, relative to other complications. Methods: An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to surgical providers across three hospitals in an academic medical system. Results: Seventy-six of 267 (28.5%) responded. The majority were somewhat (n=48, 63%) or very confident (n=12, 16%) identifying POD, however, few used validated tools (n=18, 24%). Most were somewhat (n=40, 52.6%) or very confident (n=9, 11.8%) managing POD. Few consulted geriatrics or other fields for co-management (n=23, 30.2%). Among six common complications, delirium consistently ranked third or fourth in importance. Conclusions: Future work should focus on increasing the use of validated tools and building interdisciplinary initiatives for co-management.
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.