Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33871619›Full record

Observational studyJAMA network open2021

Development and Validation of a Machine Learning Model to Estimate Bacterial Sepsis Among Immunocompromised Recipients of Stem Cell Transplant.

Margaret L Lind, Stephen J Mooney, Marco Carone, Benjamin M Althouse, Catherine Liu, Laura E Evans, Kevin Patel, Phuong T Vo, Steven A Pergam, Amanda I Phipps

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Diagnostic Yield of Repeat Blood Cultures and Risk Factors for Bloodstream Infection in Persistent Febrile Neutropenia.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Margaret L LindDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle.
Stephen J MooneyDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle.
Marco CaroneVaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
Benjamin M AlthouseInstitute for Disease Modeling, Bellevue, Washington.
Catherine LiuDivision of Allergy and Infectious Disease, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle.
Laura E EvansDivision of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle.
Kevin PatelDivision of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle.
Phuong T VoClinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
Steven A PergamVaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
Amanda I PhippsDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle.
University of Washington · USFred Hutch Cancer Center · USHarborview Injury Prevention and Research Center · USInstitute for Disease Modeling · USUniversity of Washington Medical Center · US

Funding

Translational Bioimaging Core Shared ResourceP30CA015704 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Eric Collisson · 1985 to 2026
$296.4M
NRSA Training CoreTL1TR002318 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Megan Moore · 2017 to 2026
$8.4M
The Automatic Context Measurement Tool: bringing environmental data to non-specialistsR00LM012868 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MOONEY, STEPHEN JOHN · 2019 to 2021
$687k
Using Big Data to Understand Sepsis in an Immunocompromised PopulationF31HL154509 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI LIND, MARGARET · 2020 to 2020
$41k
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR002318NCI NIH HHS P30 CA015704NHLBI NIH HHS F31 HL154509NLM NIH HHS R00 LM012868
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Sepsis disproportionately affects recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT), and timely detection is crucial. However, the atypical presentation of sepsis within this population makes detection challenging, and existing clinical sepsis tools have limited prognostic value among this high-risk population. Objective: To develop a full risk factor (demographic, transplant, clinical, and laboratory factors) and clinical factor-specific automated bacterial sepsis decision support tool for recipients of allo-HCT with potential bloodstream infections (PBIs). Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study used data from adult recipients of allo-HCT transplanted at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, between June 2010 and June 2019 randomly divided into 70% modeling and 30% validation data sets. Tools were developed using the area under the curve (AUC) optimized SuperLearner, and their performance was compared with existing clinical sepsis tools: National Early Warning Score (NEWS), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), using the validation data set. Data were analyzed between January and October of 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was high-sepsis risk bacteremia (culture confirmed gram-negative species, Staphylococcus aureus, or Streptococcus spp bacteremia), and the secondary outcomes were 10- and 28-day mortality. Tool discrimination and calibration were examined using accuracy metrics and expected vs observed probabilities. Results: Between June 2010 and June 2019, 1943 recipients of allo-HCT received their first transplant, and 1594 recipients (median [interquartile range] age at transplant, 54 [43-63] years; 911 [57.2%] men; 1242 individuals [77.9%] identifying as White) experienced at least 1 PBI. Of 8131 observed PBIs, 238 (2.9%) were high-sepsis risk bacteremia. Compared with high-sepsis risk bacteremia, the full decision support tool had the highest AUC (0.85; 95% CI, 0.81-0.89), followed by the clinical factor-specific tool (0.72; 95% CI, 0.66-0.78). SIRS had the highest AUC of existing tools (0.64; 95% CI, 0.57-0.71). The full decision support tool had the highest AUCs for PBIs identified in inpatient (0.82; 95% CI, 0.76-0.89) and outpatient (0.82; 95% CI, 0.75-0.89) settings and for 10-day (0.85; 95% CI, 0.79-0.91) and 28-day (0.80; 95% CI, 0.75-0.84) mortality. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that compared with existing tools and the clinical factor-specific tool, the full decision support tool had superior prognostic accuracy for the primary (high-sepsis risk bacteremia) and secondary (short-term mortality) outcomes in inpatient and outpatient settings. If used at the time of culture collection, the full decision support tool may inform more timely sepsis detection among recipients of allo-HCT.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesAdultFemaleHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansImmunocompetenceMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedRandom AllocationRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentROC CurveSepsis

Identifiers

PMID33871619
PMCPMC8056279
OpenAlexW3154280514

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.