ReviewCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2025
Septic Shock in Hematological Malignancies: Role of Artificial Intelligence in Predicting Outcomes.
Review in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2025. 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.
- Artificial intelligence for early sepsis detection and dynamic prognostication in onco-critical care.World journal of critical care medicine · 2026Review
- Ethical Responsibility in Medical AI: A Semi-Systematic Thematic Review and Multilevel Governance Model.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Septic shock is a life-threatening complication of sepsis, particularly in patients with hematologic diseases who are highly susceptible to it due to profound immune dysregulation. Recent advances in artificial intelligence offer promising tools for improving septic shock diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment in this vulnerable population. In detail, these innovative models analyzing electronic health records, immune function, and real-time physiological data have demonstrated superior performance compared to traditional scoring systems such as Sequential Organ Failure Assessment. In patients with hematologic malignancies, machine learning approaches have shown strong accuracy in predicting the sepsis risk using biomarkers like lactate and red cell distribution width, the latter emerging as a powerful, cost-effective predictor of mortality. Deep reinforcement learning has enabled the dynamic modelling of immune responses, facilitating the design of personalized treatment regimens helpful in reducing simulated mortality. Additionally, algorithms driven by artificial intelligence can optimize fluid and vasopressor management, corticosteroid use, and infection risk. However, challenges related to data quality, transparency, and ethical concerns must be addressed to ensure their safe integration into clinical practice. Clinically, AI could enable earlier detection of septic shock, better patient triage, and tailored therapies, potentially lowering mortality and the number of ICU admissions. However, risks like misclassification and bias demand rigorous validation and oversight. A multidisciplinary approach is crucial to ensure that AI tools are implemented responsibly, with patient-centered outcomes and safety as primary goals. Overall, artificial intelligence holds transformative potential in managing septic shock among hematologic patients by enabling timely, individualized interventions, reducing overtreatment, and improving survival in this high-risk group of patients.
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.