Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37685724›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023

Machine Learning-Based Early Prediction of Sepsis Using Electronic Health Records: A Systematic Review.

Khandaker Reajul Islam, Johayra Prithula, Jaya Kumar, Toh Leong Tan, Mamun Bin Ibne Reaz, Md Shaheenur Islam Sumon, Muhammad E H Chowdhury

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
15.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Diagnostic performance of machine-learning algorithms for sepsis prediction: An updated meta-analysis.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Khandaker Reajul IslamDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 56000, Malaysia.
Johayra PrithulaDepartment of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, University of Dhaka, Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh.
Jaya KumarDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 56000, Malaysia.
Toh Leong TanDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 56000, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-6771-0141
Mamun Bin Ibne ReazDepartment of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Independent University, Bangladesh Bashundhara, Dhaka 1229, Bangladesh.ORCID 0000-0002-0459-0365
Md Shaheenur Islam SumonDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Military Institute of Science and Technology (MIST), Dhaka 1216, Bangladesh.ORCID 0000-0001-5839-2826
Muhammad E H ChowdhuryDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Qatar University, Doha 2713, Qatar.ORCID 0000-0003-0744-8206
University Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre · MYIndependent University · BDNational University of Malaysia · MYQatar University · QAUniversity of Dhaka · BD

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSepsis, a life-threatening infection-induced inflammatory condition, has significant global health impacts. Timely detection is crucial for improving patient outcomes as sepsis can rapidly progress to severe forms. The application of machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) to predict sepsis using electronic health records (EHRs) has gained considerable attention for timely intervention.

methodsPubMed, IEEE Xplore, Google Scholar, and Scopus were searched for relevant studies. All studies that used ML/DL to detect or early-predict the onset of sepsis in the adult population using EHRs were considered. Data were extracted and analyzed from all studies that met the criteria and were also evaluated for their quality.

resultsThis systematic review examined 1942 articles, selecting 42 studies while adhering to strict criteria. The chosen studies were predominantly retrospective (n = 38) and spanned diverse geographic settings, with a focus on the United States. Different datasets, sepsis definitions, and prevalence rates were employed, necessitating data augmentation. Heterogeneous parameter utilization, diverse model distribution, and varying quality assessments were observed. Longitudinal data enabled early sepsis prediction, and quality criteria fulfillment varied, with inconsistent funding-article quality correlation.

conclusionsThis systematic review underscores the significance of ML/DL methods for sepsis detection and early prediction through EHR data.

Indexed as

deep learningearly predictionelectronic health recordemergency department (ED)intensive care unit (ICU)machine learningsepsis

Identifiers

PMID37685724
PMCPMC10488449
OpenAlexW4386307515

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.