ArticleERJ open research2024
Development and validation of a machine learning-based model for post-sepsis frailty.
Article in ERJ open research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpretable machine learning framework for frailty risk prediction using NHANES 2007-2018: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Development and validation of machine-learning diagnostic models for identifying frailty in older adults with tuberculosis: a multicentre observational study protocol.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Observational
- Transitions and determinants of ICU-acquired frailty after critical illness: A multicenter cohort study using a multistate Markov model.Annals of intensive care · 2026Article
- Constructing an early warning model for elderly sepsis patients based on machine learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The development of post-sepsis frailty is a common and significant problem, but it is a challenge to predict. Methods: Data for deep learning were extracted from a national multicentre prospective observational cohort of patients with sepsis in Korea between September 2019 and December 2021. The primary outcome was frailty at survival discharge, defined as a clinical frailty score on the Clinical Frailty Scale ≥5. We developed a deep learning model for predicting frailty after sepsis by 10 variables routinely collected at the recognition of sepsis. With cross-validation, we trained and tuned six machine learning models, including four conventional and two neural network models. Moreover, we computed the importance of each predictor variable in the model. We measured the performance of these models using a temporal validation data set. Results: A total of 8518 patients were included in the analysis; 5463 (64.1%) were frail, and 3055 (35.9%) were non-frail at discharge. The Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) achieved the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) (0.8175) and accuracy (0.7414). To confirm the generalisation performance of artificial intelligence in predicting frailty at discharge, we conducted external validation with the COVID-19 data set. The XGB still showed a good performance with an AUC of 0.7668. The machine learning model could predict frailty despite the disparity in data distribution. Conclusion: The machine learning-based model developed for predicting frailty after sepsis achieved high performance with limited baseline clinical parameters.
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.