IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0285527.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk of bias in prognostic models of hospital-induced delirium for medical-surgical units: A systematic review

Author

Listed:
  • Urszula A Snigurska
  • Yiyang Liu
  • Sarah E Ser
  • Tamara G R Macieira
  • Margaret Ansell
  • David Lindberg
  • Mattia Prosperi
  • Ragnhildur I Bjarnadottir
  • Robert J Lucero

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to assess risk of bias in existing prognostic models of hospital-induced delirium for medical-surgical units. Methods: APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched on July 8, 2022, to identify original studies which developed and validated prognostic models of hospital-induced delirium for adult patients who were hospitalized in medical-surgical units. The Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies was used for data extraction. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess risk of bias. Risk of bias was assessed across four domains: participants, predictors, outcome, and analysis. Results: Thirteen studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, including ten model development and validation studies and three model validation only studies. The methods in all of the studies were rated to be at high overall risk of bias. The methods of statistical analysis were the greatest source of bias. External validity of models in the included studies was tested at low levels of transportability. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the ongoing scientific challenge of developing a valid prognostic model of hospital-induced delirium for medical-surgical units to tailor preventive interventions to patients who are at high risk of this iatrogenic condition. With limited knowledge about generalizable prognosis of hospital-induced delirium in medical-surgical units, existing prognostic models should be used with caution when creating clinical practice policies. Future research protocols must include robust study designs which take into account the perspectives of clinicians to identify and validate risk factors of hospital-induced delirium for accurate and generalizable prognosis in medical-surgical units.

Suggested Citation

  • Urszula A Snigurska & Yiyang Liu & Sarah E Ser & Tamara G R Macieira & Margaret Ansell & David Lindberg & Mattia Prosperi & Ragnhildur I Bjarnadottir & Robert J Lucero, 2023. "Risk of bias in prognostic models of hospital-induced delirium for medical-surgical units: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(8), pages 1-19, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0285527
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285527
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0285527
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0285527&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0285527?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0285527. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.