ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Identification of correlative factors and development of a preliminary classification model for delirium superimposed on dementia: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to identify the correlative factors of delirium in patients with dementia and to preliminarily develop a classification model for probable delirium superimposed on dementia (DSD). Methods: A total of 143 dementia inpatients from a tertiary hospital were enrolled. Participants were assessed using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) to evaluate baseline cognitive status, and the Confusion Assessment Method-Chinese Revision (CAM-CR) was applied to categorize participants into the probable delirium group (CAM-CR > 19) and the non-probable delirium group (CAM-CR ≤ 19). Assessments of clinical characteristics included the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Seven-Item Scale (GAD-7), 30-Item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-30), Nurses' Global Assessment of Suicide Risk (NGASR), Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS), Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living (ADL), and Brøset Violence Checklist (BVC). Independent-samples Results: The prevalence of CAM-CR-assessed probable delirium was 40.6%. Binary logistic regression identified three independent correlative factors of probable delirium in patients with dementia: the number of comorbid physical diseases [odds ratio (OR) = 1.458, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.121-1.897], level of social support utilization (OR = 0.833, 95% CI: 0.703-0.987), and risk level of violence (medium risk: OR = 4.677, 95% CI: 1.373-15.929; high risk: OR = 13.073, 95% CI: 3.560-48.002). The final classification model, visualized via a nomogram, demonstrated an apparent AUC of 0.767 (95% CI: 0.689-0.844). Bootstrap validation (1,000 iterations) yielded an optimism-corrected AUC of 0.744 (bias = 0.023), and fivefold cross-validation produced a mean AUC of 0.735 (SD = 0.113). The calibration curve showed good agreement between predicted and observed probabilities (mean absolute error = 0.024). The Hosmer-Lemeshow test indicated good calibration ( Conclusion: The number of comorbid physical diseases, utilization of social support, and violence risk were significant correlative factors of probable delirium in dementia inpatients. The nomogram represented a proof-of-concept classification tool for DSD screening. However, given the limitations of the study design, sample size, and the absence of external validation, this model should be regarded as a preliminary tool that requires external validation before clinical application.
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.