Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32029574›Full record

Observational studyBMJ quality & safety2020

Validation of automated sepsis surveillance based on the Sepsis-3 clinical criteria against physician record review in a general hospital population: observational study using electronic health records data.

John Karlsson Valik, Logan Ward, Hideyuki Tanushi, Kajsa Müllersdorf, Anders Ternhag, Ewa Aufwerber, Anna Färnert, Anders F Johansson, Mads Lause Mogensen, Brian Pickering and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ quality & safety, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Population Sepsis Incidence, Mortality, and Trends in Hong Kong Between 2009 and 2018 Using Clinical and Administrative Data.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Validity of Routinely Reported Rutherford Scores Reported by Clinicians as Part of Daily Clinical Practice.The International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc · 2024
    Article
  19. A scoping review of the methodological approaches used in retrospective chart reviews to validate adverse event rates in administrative data.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2024
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

John Karlsson ValikDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Solna (MedS), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden john.karlsson.valik@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0002-4521-1886
Logan WardTreat Systems ApS, Aalborg, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-2697-3922
Hideyuki TanushiDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kajsa MüllersdorfDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Solna (MedS), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anders TernhagDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Solna (MedS), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ewa AufwerberDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anna FärnertDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Solna (MedS), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anders F JohanssonDepartment of Clinical microbiology and the Laboratory for Molecular Infection Medicine (MIMS), Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-0548-5943
Mads Lause MogensenTreat Systems ApS, Aalborg, Denmark.
Brian PickeringDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Hercules DalianisDepartment of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University, Kista, Sweden.
Aron HenrikssonDepartment of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University, Kista, Sweden.
Vitaly HerasevichDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Pontus NauclérDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Solna (MedS), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska University Hospital · SEMayo Clinic · USStockholm University · SEAalborg University · DKUmeå University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurveillance of sepsis incidence is important for directing resources and evaluating quality-of-care interventions. The aim was to develop and validate a fully-automated Sepsis-3 based surveillance system in non-intensive care wards using electronic health record (EHR) data, and demonstrate utility by determining the burden of hospital-onset sepsis and variations between wards.

methodsA rule-based algorithm was developed using EHR data from a cohort of all adult patients admitted at an academic centre between July 2012 and December 2013. Time in intensive care units was censored. To validate algorithm performance, a stratified random sample of 1000 hospital admissions (674 with and 326 without suspected infection) was classified according to the Sepsis-3 clinical criteria (suspected infection defined as having any culture taken and at least two doses of antimicrobials administered, and an increase in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score by

resultsIn total 82 653 hospital admissions were included. The Sepsis-3 clinical criteria determined by physician review were met in 343 of 1000 episodes. Among them, 313 (91%) had possible, probable or definite infection. Based on this reference, the algorithm achieved sensitivity 0.887 (95% CI: 0.799 to 0.964), specificity 0.985 (95% CI: 0.978 to 0.991), positive predictive value 0.881 (95% CI: 0.833 to 0.926) and negative predictive value 0.986 (95% CI: 0.973 to 0.996). When applied to the total cohort taking into account the sampling proportions of those with and without suspected infection, the algorithm identified 8599 (10.4%) sepsis episodes. The burden of hospital-onset sepsis (>48 hour after admission) and related in-hospital mortality varied between wards.

conclusionsA fully-automated Sepsis-3 based surveillance algorithm using EHR data performed well compared with physician medical record review in non-intensive care wards, and exposed variations in hospital-onset sepsis incidence between wards.

Indexed as

PhysiciansSepsisAdultElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHIV InfectionsHospital MortalityHospitals, GeneralHumansIntensive Care UnitsRetrospective Studiesadverse events, epidemiology and detectioncontinuous quality improvementcritical careinformation technologynosocomial infections

Identifiers

PMID32029574
PMCPMC7467502
OpenAlexW3004443627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.