ReviewIntensive & critical care nursing2021
Physiological machine learning models for prediction of sepsis in hospitalized adults: An integrative review.
Review in Intensive & critical care nursing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evaluating Artificial Intelligence for Sepsis Prediction in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.Journal of medical systems · 2026Pooled it
- Machine Learning for Predicting Stillbirth: A Systematic Review.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2025Pooled it
- Early detection of sepsis using machine learning algorithms: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Privacy-Aware Synthetic Tabular Data Generation for Healthcare: Application to Sepsis Detection.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Patient Benefits in the Context of Sepsis-Related AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Improved Interpretability Without Performance Reduction in a Sepsis Prediction Risk Score.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Developing a rapid screening tool for high-risk ICU patients of sepsis: integrating electronic medical records with machine learning methods for mortality prediction in hospitalized patients-model establishment, internal and external validation, and visualization.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Real-Time Prediction of Sepsis in Critical Trauma Patients: Machine Learning-Based Modeling Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Prior Distribution Estimation of Monitored Information in the Intensive Care Unit with the Hidden Markov Model and Decision Tree Methods.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Article
- Vital signs as physiomarkers of neonatal sepsis.Pediatric research · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiagnosing sepsis remains challenging. Data compiled from continuous monitoring and electronic health records allow for new opportunities to compute predictions based on machine learning techniques. There has been a lack of consensus identifying best practices for model development and validation towards early identification of sepsis.
objectiveTo evaluate the modeling approach and statistical methodology of machine learning prediction models for sepsis in the adult hospital population.
methodsPubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases were searched with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guided protocol development. We evaluated studies that developed or validated physiologic sepsis prediction models or implemented a model in the hospital environment.
resultsFourteen studies met the inclusion criteria, and the AUROC of the prediction models ranged from 0.61 to 0.96. We found a variety of sepsis definitions, methods used for event adjudication, model parameters used, and modeling methods. Two studies tested models in clinical settings; the results suggested that patient outcomes were improved with implementation of machine learning models.
conclusionNurses have a unique perspective to offer in the development and implementation of machine learning models detecting patients at risk for sepsis. More work is needed in developing model harmonization standards and testing in clinical settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33875337What 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.