SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2025
Revolutionizing sepsis diagnosis using machine learning and deep learning models: a systematic literature review.
Synthesis 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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Conformance-Aware Predictive Process Monitoring for Early Detection of Sepsis Deterioration Using Incomplete Care Pathways.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Hospital-Wide Sepsis Detection: A Machine Learning Model Based on Prospectively Expert-Validated Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Elevated C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio as an independent prognostic marker for mortality in sepsis: a multicenter cohort study.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Interpretable machine learning based on the Charlson comorbidity index predicts 28-day mortality in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Potential of Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis and Prognosis of Sepsis: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sepsis is a life-threatening condition resulting from a dysregulated immune response to infection, often leading to organ failure and death. Early detection is vital, as delays significantly worsen outcomes. In recent years, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly Machine Learning (ML) and Deep Learning (DL), has shown great promise in enhancing early sepsis detection by identifying digital biomarkers from large-scale clinical datasets. This systematic review analyzes and synthesizes existing ML/DL approaches applied to sepsis prediction, with an emphasis on intensive care unit (ICU) settings. A total of 80 studies were included, covering diverse data sources (e.g., MIMIC-III, eICU), feature selection methods, algorithm types, preprocessing techniques, and evaluation metrics. The models ranged from traditional techniques like logistic regression and decision trees to advanced architectures such as LSTM, transformers, and ensemble methods. A key contribution of this review is the inclusion of a forest plot summarizing reported AUC and sensitivity values from selected studies, offering a comparative visual of diagnostic performance. This helps highlight the relative effectiveness of different models and provides insights into their generalizability across clinical datasets. The review also discusses challenges related to model interpretability, ethical considerations, and the lack of external and temporal validation in many studies. It further identifies trends such as the use of real-time EHR data, patient-specific model development, and explainability tools like SHAP for clinician trust. By mapping out methodological strengths and limitations in current research, this work provides actionable recommendations for future studies and clinical deployment. The review contributes to the development of more robust, interpretable, and clinically relevant ML/DL models for early sepsis detection and improved patient care outcomes.
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.