Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33087760›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Individualized fluid administration for critically ill patients with sepsis with an interpretable dynamic treatment regimen model.

Zhongheng Zhang, Bin Zheng, Nan Liu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Federated Offline Reinforcement Learning.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Fluids and Early Vasopressors in the Management of Septic Shock: Do We Have the Right Answers Yet?Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2023
    Review
  9. Fluid Therapy from Friend to Foe.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Zhongheng ZhangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, No 3, East Qingchun Road, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, 310016, China. zh_zhang1984@zju.edu.cn.
Bin ZhengDepartment of Surgery, 2D, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, 2, Canada.
Nan LiuDuke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Duke-NUS Medical School · SGHealth Sciences Centre · CASir Run Run Shaw Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fluid strategy is the key to the successful management of patients with sepsis. However, previous studies failed to consider individualized treatment strategy, and clinical trials typically included patients with sepsis as a homogeneous study population. We aimed to develop sequential decision rules for managing fluid intake in patients with sepsis by using the dynamic treatment regimen (DTR) model. A retrospective analysis of the eICU Collaborative Research Database comprising highly granular data collected from 335 units at 208 hospitals was performed. The DTR model used a backward induction algorithm to estimate the sequence of optimal rules. 22,868 patients who had sepsis according to the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV diagnosis group were included. Optimal fluid management (liberal [> 40 ml/kg/d] versus restricted [< 40 ml/kg/d]) strategy were developed on the Day 1, 3 and 5 after ICU admission according to current states and treatment history. Important determinants of optimal fluid strategy included mean blood pressure, heart rate, previous urine output, previous fluid strategy, ICU type and mechanical ventilation. Different functional forms such as quadratic function and interaction terms were used at different stages. The proportion of subjects being inappropriately treated with liberal fluid strategy (i.e. those actually received liberal fluid strategy, but could have longer survival time if they received restricted fluid strategy) increased from day 1 to 5 (19.3% to 29.5%). The survival time could be significantly prolonged had all patients been treated with optimal fluid strategy (5.7 [2.0, 5.9] vs. 4.1 [2.0, 5.0] days; p < 0.001). With a large volume of sepsis data, we successfully computed out a sequence of dynamic fluid management strategy for sepsis patients over the first 5 days after ICU admission. The decision rules generated by the DTR model predicted a longer survival time compared to the true observed strategy, which sheds light for improving patient outcome with the aim from computer-assisted algorithm.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsFluid TherapyPrecision MedicineAgedCritical IllnessFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSepsisSurvival Rate

Identifiers

PMID33087760
PMCPMC7578643
OpenAlexW3093857250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.