Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34253184›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2021

Predicting mortality among septic patients presenting to the emergency department-a cross sectional analysis using machine learning.

Adam Karlsson, Willem Stassen, Amy Loutfi, Ulrika Wallgren, Eric Larsson, Lisa Kurland

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors.

Adam KarlssonDepartment of Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-9879-3421
Willem StassenDivision of emergency Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-1486-4446
Amy LoutfiAASS Research Centre, Department of Science and Technology, Örebro university, Örebro, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3122-693X
Ulrika WallgrenDepartment of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institutet, Söderssjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-5303-519X
Eric LarssonDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Centralsjukhuset, Karlstad, Sweden.
Lisa KurlandDepartment of Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden. lisa.kurland@oru.se.ORCID 0000-0003-3290-4111

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSepsis is a life-threatening condition, causing almost one fifth of all deaths worldwide. The aim of the current study was to identify variables predictive of 7- and 30-day mortality among variables reflective of the presentation of septic patients arriving to the emergency department (ED) using machine learning.

methodsRetrospective cross-sectional design, including all patients arriving to the ED at Södersjukhuset in Sweden during 2013 and discharged with an International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 code corresponding to sepsis. All predictions were made using a Balanced Random Forest Classifier and 91 variables reflecting ED presentation. An exhaustive search was used to remove unnecessary variables in the final model. A 10-fold cross validation was performed and the accuracy was described using the mean value of the following: AUC, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, positive LR and negative LR.

resultsThe study population included 445 septic patients, randomised to a training (n = 356, 80%) and a validation set (n = 89, 20%). The six most important variables for predicting 7-day mortality were: "fever", "abnormal verbal response", "low saturation", "arrival by emergency medical services (EMS)", "abnormal behaviour or level of consciousness" and "chills". The model including these variables had an AUC of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80-0.86). The final model predicting 30-day mortality used similar six variables, however, including "breathing difficulties" instead of "abnormal behaviour or level of consciousness". This model achieved an AUC = 0.80 (CI 95%, 0.78-0.82).

conclusionsThe results suggest that six specific variables were predictive of 7- and 30-day mortality with good accuracy which suggests that these symptoms, observations and mode of arrival may be important components to include along with vital signs in a future prediction tool of mortality among septic patients presenting to the ED. In addition, the Random Forests appears to be a suitable machine learning method on which to build future studies.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalHospital MortalitySepsisAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSwedenAssessmentClinical assessmentEmergency care systemsEmergency departmentInfectious diseases

Identifiers

PMID34253184
PMCPMC8276466

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.