ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2020
Using machine learning methods to predict in-hospital mortality of sepsis patients in the ICU.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
91 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prediction models for mortality in patients with sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Sepsis mortality prediction using machine learning and deep learning - a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Pooled it
- Revolutionizing sepsis diagnosis using machine learning and deep learning models: a systematic literature review.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Machine learning for the prediction of sepsis-related death: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Pooled it
- Smart Cardiac ICU: Digital Integration, Predictive Analytics, and Perioperative Inflammation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Weak-Supervision Expectation-Maximization Framework for Identifying Decisional Vulnerability in Older Emergency Department Patients.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Application of a machine learning model integrating T cell subsets and clinical markers in 28-Day mortality prediction of sepsis patients.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Models for Mortality and Outcome Prediction in Intensive Care Unit Sepsis: A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Early prognostication for ICU patients with combined respiratory and circulatory failure: an interpretable machine learning approach.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Development and external validation of a machine learning model for predicting the 28-day mortality risk in patients with sepsis complicated by acute respiratory failure in the ICU.Journal of intensive medicine · 2026Article
- Machine learning in critical care: Improving prediction of mortality and intensive care unit stay after cardiac surgery.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Machine Learning in the ICU: Predicting Mortality in Patients with Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacilli Bloodstream Infections.Journal of intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Early prediction of renal replacement therapy within 24 hours after septic shock recognition in the emergency department using machine learning: a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected multicenter registry.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Explainable machine learning for postoperative respiratory failure prediction in open-heart surgery patients - a study based on the MIMIC-IV database.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Prediction of death in burn patients infected with antibiotic-resistant Staphylococcus aureus using machine learning based techniques.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- In-hospital survival characteristics and predictive model for patients with malignant tumors and sepsis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Interpretable machine learning for prognostic prediction in critically ill patients with coronary artery disease: a multicenter study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- The impact of feature combinations on machine learning models for in-hospital mortality prediction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEarly and accurate identification of sepsis patients with high risk of in-hospital death can help physicians in intensive care units (ICUs) make optimal clinical decisions. This study aimed to develop machine learning-based tools to predict the risk of hospital death of patients with sepsis in ICUs.
methodsThe source database used for model development and validation is the medical information mart for intensive care (MIMIC) III. We identified adult sepsis patients using the new sepsis definition Sepsis-3. A total of 86 predictor variables consisting of demographics, laboratory tests and comorbidities were used. We employed the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), random forest (RF), gradient boosting machine (GBM) and the traditional logistic regression (LR) method to develop prediction models. In addition, the prediction performance of the four developed models was evaluated and compared with that of an existent scoring tool - simplified acute physiology score (SAPS) II - using five different performance measures: the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), Brier score, sensitivity, specificity and calibration plot.
resultsThe records of 16,688 sepsis patients in MIMIC III were used for model training and test. Amongst them, 2949 (17.7%) patients had in-hospital death. The average AUROCs of the LASSO, RF, GBM, LR and SAPS II models were 0.829, 0.829, 0.845, 0.833 and 0.77, respectively. The Brier scores of the LASSO, RF, GBM, LR and SAPS II models were 0.108, 0.109, 0.104, 0.107 and 0.146, respectively. The calibration plots showed that the GBM, LASSO and LR models had good calibration; the RF model underestimated high-risk patients; and SAPS II had the poorest calibration.
conclusionThe machine learning-based models developed in this study had good prediction performance. Amongst them, the GBM model showed the best performance in predicting the risk of in-hospital death. It has the potential to assist physicians in the ICU to perform appropriate clinical interventions for critically ill sepsis patients and thus may help improve the prognoses of sepsis patients in the ICU.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.