ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia2025
Biological subphenotypes in patients hospitalized with suspected infection in Thailand: a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Subphenotypes of infected patients have been reported in Europe and North America, but few studies have investigated populations in Southeast Asia. We sought to identify and differentiate subphenotypes of patients hospitalized with suspected infection in rural Thailand using biological markers implicated in the dysregulated host response. Methods: In a cohort of prospectively enrolled patients hospitalized with suspected infection in northeastern Thailand, we measured 15 circulating biomarkers from a random selection of 585 subjects and developed latent profile models to identify subphenotypes. Patient characteristics were compared after subphenotype assignment, and a parsimonious model was developed to identify patient subphenotypes. Findings: We identified and assigned 585 patients to three subphenotypes termed latent biological profile (LBP)-1 (52%), LBP-2 (39%) and LBP-3 (9%). Patients assigned to LBP-3 had a higher risk of 28-day mortality compared to those in LBP-1 and LBP-2 (adjusted relative risk 1.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-2.9, P = 0.02). Patient clinical characteristics and biomarker concentrations also differed by subphenotype assignment. A parsimonious three-biomarker model identified subphenotypes in an internal validation cohort (LBP-1: area under the receiver operating curve [AUC] 0.96, 95% CI: 0.94-0.98; LBP-2: AUC 0.77, 95% CI 0.71-0.83; LBP-3: AUC 0.99, 95% CI 0.98-1.00). Interpretation: We identified three biological subphenotypes of patients with suspected infection in rural Thailand, where the burden of infection is high but understudied. Patient subphenotype assignment was characterized by distinct clinical outcomes and biological profiles which could inform contextualized future study design. Funding: The US National Institutes of Health, the Wellcome Trust, and the Firland Foundation.
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.