Home › Research › Risk factors
Calculating cognitive decline in delirium
Philip J. Regal. Age and Ageing, 2014-06-22
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The 101 CADIS patients demonstrated several new findings: (i) the mean delay between symptom onset and admission was 1.4 days; (ii) for daily attention tests, 5-digit span forward improved to baseline in a mean of 1.3 days, whereas 6-digit span improved in a mean of 5.7 days; (iii) Delirium index, a 7-question instrument for monitoring delirium [2–3] improved to baseline in a mean of 5.8 days.
Key findings
- The 101 CADIS patients demonstrated several new findings: (i) the mean delay between symptom onset and admission was 1.4 days; (ii) for daily attention tests, 5-digit span forward improved to baseline in a mean of 1.3 days, whereas 6-digit span improved in a mean of 5.7 days; (iii) Delirium index, a 7-question instrument for monitoring delirium [2–3] improved to baseline in a mean of 5.8 days.
Why it matters
This report describes timing findings in 101 patients with delirium, including how long daily attention tests and a delirium index took to improve to baseline. It concerns delirium, not Alzheimer's disease, and reports no treatment or prevention effect.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 30/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 29 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 30 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Age and Ageing) |
| Journal's citation record | 2 / 4 | Age and Ageing: journal h-index 231 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2014 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 1 / 7 | Cited 1 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.1 citations a year over 14 year(s) since 2014 |
| Impact for its field and year | 1 / 6 | Cited 0.2× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | 0 / 3 | University of Newcastle Australia: institution h-index 673 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 24958094) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 29 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 29 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 30 out of 100. |
| Total | 30 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Regal, P. J. (2014). Calculating cognitive decline in delirium. Age and Ageing. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afu076
Vancouver
Regal PJ. Calculating cognitive decline in delirium. Age and Ageing. 2014. doi:10.1093/ageing/afu076. PMID: 24958094.
BibTeX
@article{regal2014-24958094,
author = {Regal, Philip J.},
title = {{Calculating cognitive decline in delirium}},
journal = {Age and Ageing},
year = {2014},
doi = {10.1093/ageing/afu076},
pmid = {24958094},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afu076}
}
Related studies in Risk factors
Also tagged “delirium”
858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “delirium”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.