ArticleHeliyon2023
Construction and dual internal validation of a short-term prognostic scoring tool for sepsis.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prediction models for mortality in patients with sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To construct and validate a simple and easily administered scoring tool for the prediction of short-term prognostic survival in adult patients with sepsis. Methods: This study is a retrospective and prospective cohort study. A total of 382 patients with sepsis. 274 sepsis patients from January 2020 to December 2020 were collected as the modeling group and 54 sepsis patients from January 2021 to December 2021 and April to May 2022 in the hospital were randomly collected as the validation group. They were divided into survival and non-survival groups according to the outcome. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted with subgroup analysis. The resulting models were tested using the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. The prognostic value of the variables on prognosis was expressed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). A scoring tool was constructed and tested for the prognostic value of this score in the validation group. Results: The model had an AUC of 0.880 [95% CI (0.838-0.922), Conclusions: Age, shock, lactate, lactate/albumin ratio (L/A), and interleukin-6 (IL-6) are five risk factors for adult sepsis prognosis in an early emergency. This scoring tool is developed to quickly assess the short-term survival outcome in adult sepsis patients. It is straightforward and easy to administer. It also has a high prognostic predictive value.The Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200058375).
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.