↓ Skip to main content

Diagnostic test accuracy of a novel smartphone application for the assessment of attention deficits in delirium in older hospitalised patients: a prospective cohort study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Diagnostic test accuracy of a novel smartphone application for the assessment of attention deficits in delirium in older hospitalised patients: a prospective cohort study protocol
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12877-018-0901-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa-Marie Rutter, Eva Nouzova, David J. Stott, Christopher J. Weir, Valentina Assi, Jennifer H. Barnett, Caoimhe Clarke, Nikki Duncan, Jonathan Evans, Samantha Green, Kirsty Hendry, Meigan McGinlay, Jenny McKeever, Duncan G. Middleton, Stuart Parks, Robert Shaw, Elaine Tang, Tim Walsh, Alexander J. Weir, Elizabeth Wilson, Tara Quasim, Alasdair M.J. MacLullich, Zoë Tieges

Abstract

Delirium is a common and serious clinical syndrome which is often missed in routine clinical care. The core cognitive feature is inattention. We developed a novel bedside neuropsychological test for assessing inattention in delirium implemented on a smartphone platform (DelApp). We aim to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the DelApp in a representative cohort of older hospitalised patients. This is a prospective study of older non-scheduled hospitalised patients (target n = 500, age ≥ 65), recruited from elderly care and acute orthopaedic wards. Exclusion criteria are: non-English speakers; severe vision or hearing impairment; photosensitive epilepsy. A structured reference standard delirium assessment based on DSM-5 criteria will be used, which includes a cognitive test battery administered by a trained assessor (Orientation-Memory-Concentration Test, Abbreviated Mental Test-10, Delirium Rating Severity Scale-Revised-98, digit span, months and days backwards, Vigilance A' test) and assessment of arousal (Observational Scale of Level of Arousal, Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale). Prior change in cognition will be documented using the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly. Patients will be categorized as delirium (with/without dementia), possible delirium, dementia, no cognitive impairment, or undetermined. A separate assessor (blinded to diagnosis and assessments) will administer the DelApp index test within 3 h of the reference standard assessment. The DelApp comprises assessment of arousal (score 0-4) and sustained attention (score 0-6), yielding a total score between 0 and 10 (higher score = better performance). Outcomes (length of stay, mortality and discharge location) will be collected at 12 weeks. We will evaluate a priori cutpoints derived from a previous case-control study. Measures of the accuracy of DelApp will include sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the ROC curve. We plan repeat assessments on up to 4 occasions in a purposive subsample of 30 patients (15 delirium, 15 no delirium) to examine changes over time. This study evaluates the diagnostic test accuracy of a novel smartphone test for delirium in a representative cohort of older hospitalised patients, including those with dementia. DelApp has the potential to be a convenient, objective method of improving delirium assessment for older people in acute care. Clinical trials.gov, NCT02590796 . Registered on 29 Oct 2015. Protocol version 5, dated 25 July 2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 105 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Researcher 11 10%
Other 8 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 33 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 11%
Psychology 10 10%
Neuroscience 7 7%
Engineering 5 5%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 35 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 July 2019.
All research outputs
#2,383,675
of 24,719,968 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#611
of 3,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,667
of 346,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#21
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,719,968 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,468 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 346,745 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.