ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Hospital-wide, dynamic, individualized prediction of central line-associated bloodstream infections-development and temporal evaluation of six prediction models.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning and SHAP-based risk assessment of PICC-related bloodstream infections in premature infants at the time of clinical suspicion.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Challenges and Recommendations for Electronic Health Records Data Extraction and Preparation for Dynamic Prediction Modeling in Hospitalized Patients: Practical Guide and Tutorial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence-driven prediction and interpretation of central line-associated bloodstream infections in ICU: insights from the MIMIC-IV database.Frontiers in public health · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCentral line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) are preventable hospital-acquired infections. Predicting CLABSI helps improve early intervention strategies and enhance patient safety.
aimTo develop and temporally evaluate dynamic prediction models for continuous CLABSI risk monitoring.
methodsData from hospitalized patients with central catheter(s) admitted to University Hospitals Leuven between 2014 and 2017 were used to develop five dynamic models (a landmark cause-specific model, two random forest models, and two XGBoost models) to predict 7-day CLABSI risk, accounting for competing events (death, discharge, and catheter removal). The models' predictions were then combined using a superlearner model. All models were temporally evaluated on data from the same hospital from 2018 to 2020 using performance metrics for discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility.
findingsAmong 61629 catheter episodes in the training set, 1930 (3.1%) resulted in CLABSI, while in the test set of 44544 catheter episodes, 1059 (2.4%) experienced CLABSI. Among individual models, one XGBoost model achieved the highest AUROC of 0.748. Calibration was good for predicted risks up to 5%, while the cause-specific and XGBoost models overestimated higher predicted risks. The superlearner displayed a modest improvement in discrimination (AUROC up to 0.751) and better calibration than the cause-specific and XGBoost models, but worse than the random forest models. The models showed clinical utility to support standard care interventions (at risk thresholds between 0.5-4%), but not to support advanced interventions (at thresholds 15-25%).
conclusionHospital-wide CLABSI prediction models offer clinical utility based on medium-risk thresholds. Clinical utility at present may be limited as the model performance deteriorated over time.
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.