Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 788

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validation of the 4AT, a new instrument for rapid delirium screening: a study in 234 hospitalised older people

Open access
Bellelli, G., Morandi, A., Davis, D. H. J., Mazzola, P., Turco, R., Gentile, S., Ryan, T., Cash, H., Guerini, F., Torpilliesi, T., Del Santo, F., Trabucchi, M., Annoni, G., MacLullich, A. M. J.·2014·Age and Ageing
DOI 10.1093/ageing/afu021
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the performance of the 4 'A's Test (4AT) in screening for delirium in older patients. The 4AT is a new test for rapid screening of delirium in routine clinical practice. DESIGN: : prospective study of consecutively admitted elderly patients with independent 4AT and reference standard assessments. SETTING: : an acute geriatrics ward and a department of rehabilitation. PARTICIPANTS: two hundred and thirty-six patients (aged ≥70 years) consecutively admitted over a period of 4 months. MEASUREMENTS: in each centre, the 4AT was administered by a geriatrician to eligible patients within 24 h of admission. Reference standard delirium diagnosis (DSM-IV-TR criteria) was obtained within 30 min by a different geriatrician who was blind to the 4AT score. The presence of dementia was assessed using the Alzheimer's Questionnaire and the informant section of the Clinical Dementia Rating scale. The main outcome measure was the accuracy of the 4AT in diagnosing delirium. RESULTS: patients were 83.9 ± 6.1 years old, and the majority were women (64%). Delirium was detected in 12.3% (n = 29), dementia in 31.2% (n = 74) and a combination of both in 7.2% (n = 17). The 4AT had a sensitivity of 89.7% and specificity 84.1% for delirium. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for delirium diagnosis were 0.93 in the whole population, 0.92 in patients without dementia and 0.89 in patients with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: the 4AT is a sensitive and specific method of screening for delirium in hospitalised older people. Its brevity and simplicity support its use in routine clinical practice.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ageing/afu021

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 788

Metadata

Authors
Bellelli, G., Morandi, A., Davis, D. H. J., Mazzola, P., Turco, R., Gentile, S., Ryan, T., Cash, H., Guerini, F., Torpilliesi, T., Del Santo, F., Trabucchi, M., Annoni, G., & MacLullich, A. M. J.
Venue
Age and Ageing
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2014-03-02
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
496-502
ISSN
  • 0002-0729 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2834
DOI
10.1093/ageing/afu021
OpenAlex
W2136122319
Cited by
788
References
25
FWCI
26.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

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.