ArticleBiomedicines2022
Using Machine Learning to Develop and Validate an In-Hospital Mortality Prediction Model for Patients with Suspected Sepsis.
Article in Biomedicines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- AI-Based Sepsis Prediction in Hospitalized Adults: Systematic Review, Subgroup Meta-Analysis, and Contextual Analysis of Clinical Burden.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluating Artificial Intelligence for Sepsis Prediction in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.Journal of medical systems · 2026Pooled it
- Sepsis mortality prediction using machine learning and deep learning - a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Pooled it
- Machine learning for the prediction of sepsis-related death: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Pooled it
- Dissecting the pathobiology of suspected sepsis through a comparative analysis of endothelial inflammatory and clinical prediction models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- An interpretable machine learning model for predicting in-hospital mortality in ICU patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia.PloS one · 2025Article
- Interpretable machine learning model for early morbidity risk prediction in patients with sepsis-induced coagulopathy: a multi-center study.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Conventional and unconventional T-cell responses contribute to the prediction of clinical outcome and causative bacterial pathogen in sepsis patients.Clinical and experimental immunology · 2024Article
- Advancements in Artificial Intelligence in Emergency Medicine in Taiwan: A Narrative Review.Journal of acute medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEarly recognition of sepsis and the prediction of mortality in patients with infection are important. This multi-center, ED-based study aimed to develop and validate a 28-day mortality prediction model for patients with infection using various machine learning (ML) algorithms.
methodsPatients with acute infection requiring intravenous antibiotic treatment during the first 24 h of admission were prospectively recruited. Patient demographics, comorbidities, clinical signs and symptoms, laboratory test data, selected sepsis-related novel biomarkers, and 28-day mortality were collected and divided into training (70%) and testing (30%) datasets. Logistic regression and seven ML algorithms were used to develop the prediction models. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was used to compare different models.
resultsA total of 555 patients were recruited with a full panel of biomarker tests. Among them, 18% fulfilled Sepsis-3 criteria, with a 28-day mortality rate of 8%. The wrapper algorithm selected 30 features, including disease severity scores, biochemical parameters, and conventional and few sepsis-related biomarkers. Random forest outperformed other ML models (AUROC: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.93-0.98) and SOFA and early warning scores (AUROC: 0.64-0.84) in the prediction of 28-day mortality in patients with infection. Additionally, random forest remained the best-performing model, with an AUROC of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.91-0.98,
conclusionsOur results demonstrated that ML models provide a more accurate prediction of 28-day mortality with an enhanced ability in dealing with multi-dimensional data than the logistic regression model.
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.