Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24043317›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Medical decision support using machine learning for early detection of late-onset neonatal sepsis.

Subramani Mani, Asli Ozdas, Constantin Aliferis, Huseyin Atakan Varol, Qingxia Chen, Randy Carnevale, Yukun Chen, Joann Romano-Keeler, Hui Nian, Jörn-Hendrik Weitkamp

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

77 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 194 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Present and future of microbiome-targeting therapeutics.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2025
    Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Subramani ManiDepartment of Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.
Asli Ozdas
Constantin Aliferis
Huseyin Atakan Varol
Qingxia Chen
Randy Carnevale
Yukun Chen
Joann Romano-Keeler
Hui Nian
Jörn-Hendrik Weitkamp
Vanderbilt University · USUniversity of New Mexico · USNazarbayev University · KZNew York University · US

Funding

University of New Mexico Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR000041 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI LARSON, RICHARD S · 2012 to 2014
$9.8M
Preventing Prematurity and Poor Pregnancy Outcomes Training GrantT32HD068256 · NICHD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI REESE, JOHN JEFFREY, STARK, ANN R · 2011 to 2015
$1.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000041NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD068256
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective was to develop non-invasive predictive models for late-onset neonatal sepsis from off-the-shelf medical data and electronic medical records (EMR).

designThe data used in this study are from 299 infants admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit in the Monroe Carell Jr. Children's Hospital at Vanderbilt and evaluated for late-onset sepsis. Gold standard diagnostic labels (sepsis negative, culture positive sepsis, culture negative/clinical sepsis) were assigned based on all the laboratory, clinical and microbiology data available in EMR. Only data that were available up to 12 h after phlebotomy for blood culture testing were used to build predictive models using machine learning (ML) algorithms. MEASUREMENT: We compared sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of sepsis treatment of physicians with the predictions of models generated by ML algorithms.

resultsThe treatment sensitivity of all the nine ML algorithms and specificity of eight out of the nine ML algorithms tested exceeded that of the physician when culture-negative sepsis was included. When culture-negative sepsis was excluded both sensitivity and specificity exceeded that of the physician for all the ML algorithms. The top three predictive variables were the hematocrit or packed cell volume, chorioamnionitis and respiratory rate.

conclusionsPredictive models developed from off-the-shelf and EMR data using ML algorithms exceeded the treatment sensitivity and treatment specificity of clinicians. A prospective study is warranted to assess the clinical utility of the ML algorithms in improving the accuracy of antibiotic use in the management of neonatal sepsis.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedElectronic Health RecordsAnti-Bacterial AgentsDecision Support TechniquesHumansInfant, NewbornIntensive Care Units, NeonatalSensitivity and SpecificitySepsisAnti-Bacterial AgentsDecision SupportEarly DetectionElectronic Medical RecordsMachine LearningNeonatal SepsisPredictive Models

Identifiers

PMID24043317
PMCPMC3932458
OpenAlexW1866881459

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.