Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35632275›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Sepsis Mortality Prediction Using Wearable Monitoring in Low-Middle Income Countries.

Shadi Ghiasi, Tingting Zhu, Ping Lu, Jannis Hagenah, Phan Nguyen Quoc Khanh, Nguyen Van Hao, Vital Consortium, Louise Thwaites, David A Clifton

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. An overview and a roadmap for artificial intelligence in hematology and oncology.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023
    Review
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Shadi GhiasiDepartment of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.
Tingting ZhuDepartment of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1552-5630
Ping LuDepartment of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0199-3783
Jannis HagenahDepartment of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3320-0186
Phan Nguyen Quoc KhanhOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City 710400, Vietnam.ORCID 0000-0002-7455-8862
Nguyen Van HaoHospital of Tropical Diseases, Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam.
Vital Consortium
Louise ThwaitesOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Ho Chi Minh City 710400, Vietnam.
David A CliftonDepartment of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.
University of Oxford · GBOxford University Clinical Research Unit · VNHospital for Tropical Diseases · VN

Funding

National Institute for Health Research Not SpecifiedWellcome Trust 217650/Z/19/Z.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sepsis is associated with high mortality-particularly in low-middle income countries (LMICs). Critical care management of sepsis is challenging in LMICs due to the lack of care providers and the high cost of bedside monitors. Recent advances in wearable sensor technology and machine learning (ML) models in healthcare promise to deliver new ways of digital monitoring integrated with automated decision systems to reduce the mortality risk in sepsis. In this study, firstly, we aim to assess the feasibility of using wearable sensors instead of traditional bedside monitors in the sepsis care management of hospital admitted patients, and secondly, to introduce automated prediction models for the mortality prediction of sepsis patients. To this end, we continuously monitored 50 sepsis patients for nearly 24 h after their admission to the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Vietnam. We then compared the performance and interpretability of state-of-the-art ML models for the task of mortality prediction of sepsis using the heart rate variability (HRV) signal from wearable sensors and vital signs from bedside monitors. Our results show that all ML models trained on wearable data outperformed ML models trained on data gathered from the bedside monitors for the task of mortality prediction with the highest performance (area under the precision recall curve = 0.83) achieved using time-varying features of HRV and recurrent neural networks. Our results demonstrate that the integration of automated ML prediction models with wearable technology is well suited for helping clinicians who manage sepsis patients in LMICs to reduce the mortality risk of sepsis.

Indexed as

SepsisWearable Electronic DevicesDeveloping CountriesHumansMachine LearningVital Signscontinuous physiological signalselectrocardiogramheart rate variabilitylow–middle income countriesmachine learningresource-limitedsepsisVietnamwearable sensors

Identifiers

PMID35632275
PMCPMC9145695
OpenAlexW4280531286

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.