The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Delirium in Elderly Patients and the Risk of Postdischarge Mortality, Institutionalization, and Dementia: A Meta-analysis
Abstract
CONTEXT: Delirium is a common and serious complication in elderly patients. Evidence suggests that delirium is associated with long-term poor outcome but delirium often occurs in individuals with more severe underlying disease. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between delirium in elderly patients and long-term poor outcome, defined as mortality, institutionalization, or dementia, while controlling for important confounders. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of studies published between January 1981 and April 2010 was conducted using the databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies of elderly patients with delirium as a study variable and data on mortality, institutionalization, or dementia after a minimum follow-up of 3 months, and published in the English or Dutch language. Titles, abstracts, and articles were reviewed independently by 2 of the authors. Of 2939 references in the original search, 51 relevant articles were identified. DATA EXTRACTION: Information on study design, characteristics of the study population, and outcome were extracted. Quality of studies was assessed based on elements of the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist for cohort studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: The primary analyses included only high-quality studies with statistical control for age, sex, comorbid illness or illness severity, and baseline dementia. Pooled-effect estimates were calculated with random-effects models. The primary analysis with adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) showed that delirium is associated with an increased risk of death compared with controls after an average follow-up of 22.7 months (7 studies; 271/714 patients [38.0%] with delirium, 616/2243 controls [27.5%]; HR, 1.95 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.51-2.52]; I(2), 44.0%). Moreover, patients who had experienced delirium were also at increased risk of institutionalization (7 studies; average follow-up, 14.6 months; 176/527 patients [33.4%] with delirium and 219/2052 controls [10.7%]; odds ratio [OR], 2.41 [95% CI, 1.77-3.29]; I(2), 0%) and dementia (2 studies; average follow-up, 4.1 years; 35/56 patients [62.5%] with delirium and 15/185 controls [8.1%]; OR, 12.52 [95% CI, 1.86-84.21]; I(2), 52.4%). The sensitivity, trim-and-fill, and secondary analyses with unadjusted high-quality risk estimates stratified according to the study characteristics confirmed the robustness of these results. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis provides evidence that delirium in elderly patients is associated with poor outcome independent of important confounders, such as age, sex, comorbid illness or illness severity, and baseline dementia.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., Vandenbroucke, J. P., & Initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040296 · Cited by 23,020
Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology<SUBTITLE>A Proposal for Reporting</SUBTITLE>
Stroup, D. F. (2000) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.283.15.2008 · Cited by 20,623
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis
Jüni, P. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.11.1054 · Cited by 1,981
Empirical assessment of effect of publication bias on meta-analyses
Sutton, A. J. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7249.1574 · Cited by 1,398
Fixed-effect versus random-effects models
(2009) · Introduction to Meta‐Analysis · doi:10.1002/9780470743386.ch13 · Cited by 247
Cited by
Inouye, S. K., Westendorp, R. G., & Saczynski, J. S. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60688-1 · Cited by 3,722
Systemic inflammation and microglial activation: systematic review of animal experiments
Hoogland, I. C. M., Houbolt, C., van Westerloo, D. J., van Gool, W. A., & van de Beek, D. (2015) · Journal of Neuroinflammation · doi:10.1186/s12974-015-0332-6 · Cited by 957
Effectiveness of Multicomponent Nonpharmacological Delirium Interventions: A Meta-analysis
Hshieh, T. T., Yue, J., Oh, E., Puelle, M., Dowal, S., Travison, T., & Inouye, S. K. (2015) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.7779 · Cited by 801
Bellelli, G., Morandi, A., Davis, D. H. J., Mazzola, P., Turco, R., Gentile, S., Ryan, T., Cash, H., Guerini, F., Torpilliesi, T., et al. (2014) · Age and Ageing · doi:10.1093/ageing/afu021 · Cited by 788
Microglia and neurodegeneration: The role of systemic inflammation
Cunningham, C. (2013) · Glia · doi:10.1002/glia.22350 · Cited by 769
Metadata
- Authors
- Witlox, J., Eurelings, L. S. M., de Jonghe, J. F. M., Kalisvaart, K. J., Eikelenboom, P., & van Gool, W. A.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2010-07-28
- Volume
- 304
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 443
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2054232191
- Cited by
- 1,960
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 47.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Delirium in Elderly Patients and the Risk of Postdischarge Mortality, Institutionalization, and Dementia: A Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2010.1013
- The paper
- Witlox, J., Eurelings, L. S. M., de Jonghe, J. F. M., Kalisvaart, K. J., Eikelenboom, P., & van Gool, W. A. (2010). Delirium in Elderly Patients and the Risk of Postdischarge Mortality, Institutionalization, and Dementia: A Meta-analysis. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.1013
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.