ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2023
A predictive model for the identification of the risk of sepsis in patients with Gram-positive bacteria in the intensive care unit.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Presepsin, procalcitonin, interleukin-6, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein for predicting bacterial DNAaemia among patients with sepsis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Monitoring vancomycin blood concentrations reduces mortality risk in critically ill patients: a retrospective cohort study using the MIMIC-IV database.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gram-positive bacterial infections are very common in the intensive care unit (ICU) and may lead to sepsis. However, there are no models to predict the risk of sepsis in persons with Gram-positive bacterial infections. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to create and validate a nomogram for predicting the risk of sepsis in patients with common gram-positive bacterial infections. Methods: Patients infected with three common Gram-positive bacteria who were admitted to the Multiparameter Intelligent Monitoring in Intensive Care IV (MIMIC IV) database were included in this retrospective cohort study. A Cox regression model was used to develop a nomogram for predicting 3-day, 1-week, 2-week, and 1-month sepsis probability. The performance of the nomogram was analyzed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curves. Results: In total, 19,961 eligible patients were enrolled from MIMIC IV datasets. All participants were allocated to training and validation cohorts at random in a 7:3 ratio. The use of more than 3 types of antibiotics, dementia, ethnicity, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), neutrophils, the use of antifungal drug, ventilation and need for vasopressors were all discovered to be highly correlated with enhanced probability of sepsis in patients with Gram-positive bacteria. A prediction nomogram was constructed using these 8 predictors. The area under the curve (AUC) for predicting 3-day, 1-week, 2-week, and 1-month sepsis risk in the training cohort was 0.857, 0.774, 0.740, and 0.728, respectively, and that in the validation cohort was 0.855, 0.781, 0.742, and 0.742, respectively. The predictive power of our model is better than the SOFA score. The model had good predictive performance in all three classes of Gram-positive bacteria. Based on the calibration and clinical decision curves, the nomogram correctly predicted sepsis in patients with Gram-positive bacteria. Conclusions: We were able to build a nomogram to predict the probability of sepsis in patients with Gram-positive bacteria, particularly those infected with
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.