ArticleScientific reports2023
Exploring a global interpretation mechanism for deep learning networks when predicting sepsis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence based predictive models for early sepsis detection in intensive care units: a scoping review.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Improving clinical decision support through interpretable machine learning and error handling in electronic health records.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- The Clinical View of Sepsis-Associated AKI: How Basic Science Can Help Solve This Problem.Seminars in nephrology · 2025Review
- The ethics of data mining in healthcare: challenges, frameworks, and future directions.BioData mining · 2025Review
- Predicting outcomes using neural networks in the intensive care unit.World journal of clinical cases · 2025Article
- Identifying sepsis susceptibility genes in post-surgical patients using an artificial intelligence approach.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Efficient sepsis detection using deep learning and residual convolutional networks.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
- scCaT: An explainable capsulating architecture for sepsis diagnosis transferring from single-cell RNA sequencing.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Improving sepsis prediction in intensive care with SepsisAI: A clinical decision support system with a focus on minimizing false alarms.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Patent and Bibliometric Analysis of the Scientific Landscape of the Use of Pulse Oximeters and Their Prospects in the Field of Digital Medicine.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Machine Learning-Based Early Prediction of Sepsis Using Electronic Health Records: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to identify additional clinical features for sepsis detection through the use of a novel mechanism for interpreting black-box machine learning models trained and to provide a suitable evaluation for the mechanism. We use the publicly available dataset from the 2019 PhysioNet Challenge. It has around 40,000 Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients with 40 physiological variables. Using Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) as the representative black-box machine learning model, we adapted the Multi-set Classifier to globally interpret the black-box model for concepts it learned about sepsis. To identify relevant features, the result is compared against: (i) features used by a computational sepsis expert, (ii) clinical features from clinical collaborators, (iii) academic features from literature, and (iv) significant features from statistical hypothesis testing. Random Forest was found to be the computational sepsis expert because it had high accuracies for solving both the detection and early detection, and a high degree of overlap with clinical and literature features. Using the proposed interpretation mechanism and the dataset, we identified 17 features that the LSTM used for sepsis classification, 11 of which overlaps with the top 20 features from the Random Forest model, 10 with academic features and 5 with clinical features. Clinical opinion suggests, 3 LSTM features have strong correlation with some clinical features that were not identified by the mechanism. We also found that age, chloride ion concentration, pH and oxygen saturation should be investigated further for connection with developing sepsis. Interpretation mechanisms can bolster the incorporation of state-of-the-art machine learning models into clinical decision support systems, and might help clinicians to address the issue of early sepsis detection. The promising results from this study warrants further investigation into creation of new and improvement of existing interpretation mechanisms for black-box models, and into clinical features that are currently not used in clinical assessment of sepsis.
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.