ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Early Detection of Septic Shock Onset Using Interpretable Machine Learners.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Predictive Modeling for Early Detection of Sepsis in Hospitalized Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Critical care explorations · 2025Pooled it
- Progress in sepsis prediction models: from traditional scoring systems to multimodal intelligence and clinical translation.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- [Research advances on the application of artificial intelligence technology in the diagnosis and treatment of sepsis patients].Zhonghua shao shang yu chuang mian xiu fu za zhi · 2025Review
- Time-series deep learning and conformal prediction for improved sepsis diagnosis in primarily Non-ICU hospitalized patients.Computers in biology and medicine · 2025Article
- Machine Learning Models for Predicting in-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Comparative Analysis with Logistic Regression.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Exploring the Potentials of Artificial Intelligence in Sepsis Management in the Intensive Care Unit.Critical care research and practice · 2025Review
- Machine learning for predicting acute myocardial infarction in patients with sepsis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Recent Advances in Artificial Intelligence to Improve Immunotherapy and the Use of Digital Twins to Identify Prognosis of Patients with Solid Tumors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Machine Learning Models for Tracking Blood Loss and Resuscitation in a Hemorrhagic Shock Swine Injury Model.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Parsimonious Waveform-derived Features consisting of Pulse Arrival Time and Heart Rate Variability Predicts the Onset of Septic Shock.Biomedical signal processing and control · 2024Article
- A scoping review of machine learning for sepsis prediction- feature engineering strategies and model performance: a step towards explainability.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Article
- Review
- Development of continuous warning system for timely prediction of septic shock.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: A Double-edged Sword or a Pandora's Box?Oman medical journal · 2023Article
- Dynamic Prediction of Patient Outcomes in the Intensive Care Unit: A Scoping Review of the State-of-the-Art.Journal of intensive care medicine · 2023Article
- An Individualized Nomogram for Predicting Mortality Risk of Septic Shock Patients During Hospitalization: A ten Years Retrospective Analysis.Infection and drug resistance · 2023Article
- Machine learning models for predicting in-hospital mortality in patient with sepsis: Analysis of vital sign dynamics.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Machine learning predicts cancer subtypes and progression from blood immune signatures.PloS one · 2022Article
- Imputation of missing values for electronic health record laboratory data.NPJ digital medicine · 2021Article
- Predicting short and long-term mortality after acute ischemic stroke using EHR.Journal of the neurological sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeveloping a decision support system based on advances in machine learning is one area for strategic innovation in healthcare. Predicting a patient's progression to septic shock is an active field of translational research. The goal of this study was to develop a working model of a clinical decision support system for predicting septic shock in an acute care setting for up to 6 h from the time of admission in an integrated healthcare setting.
methodClinical data from Electronic Health Record (EHR), at encounter level, were used to build a predictive model for progression from sepsis to septic shock up to 6 h from the time of admission; that is,
resultsRetrospective data from April 2005 to September 2018 were extracted from the EHR, Insurance Claims, Billing, and Laboratory Systems to create a dataset for septic shock detection. The clinical criteria and billing information were used to label patients into two classes-septic shock patients and sepsis patients at three different time points from admission, creating two different case-control cohorts. Data from 45,425 unique in-patient visits were used to build 96 prediction models comparing clinical-based definition versus billing-based information as the gold standard. Of the 24 consolidated models (based on eight machine learning algorithms and three feature windows), four models reached an AUROC greater than 0.9. Overall, all the consolidated models reached an AUROC of at least 0.8820 or higher. Based on the AUROC of 0.9483, the best model was based on Random Forest, with a sensitivity of 83.9% and specificity of 88.1%. The sepsis detection window at 6 h outperformed the 1 and 3-h windows. The sepsis definition based on clinical variables had improved performance when compared to the sepsis definition based on only billing information.
conclusionThis study corroborated that machine learning models can be developed to predict septic shock using clinical and administrative data. However, the use of clinical information to define septic shock outperformed models developed based on only administrative data. Intelligent decision support tools can be developed and integrated into the EHR and improve clinical outcomes and facilitate the optimization of resources in real-time.
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.