ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2025
Machine learning-based time-to-event survival analysis in pediatric patients with severe sepsis.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 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.
- Accurate prediction of mortality in children with sepsis: development and validation of an explainable model based on real-world data.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Multi-omic and computational approaches for biomarker discovery and clinical translation in pediatric sepsis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pediatric sepsis remains a leading cause of mortality in critically ill children worldwide. Current approaches to sepsis prognosis rely on clinical criteria and biomarkers with variable performance. This study aimed to develop and validate time-to-event survival prediction models for pediatric sepsis using survival analysis machine learning algorithms. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 223 pediatric sepsis patients from a pediatric intensive care database (2010-2018). Five survival analysis machine learning algorithms were evaluated: CoxPHSurvivalAnalysis, HingeLossSurvivalSVM, GradientBoostingSurvivalAnalysis, RandomSurvivalForest, and ExtraSurvivalTrees. These algorithms predict survival time rather than binary outcomes. Model performance was assessed using time-dependent area under the curve (td-AUC), concordance index (c-index), Brier score, and calibration curves. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was performed for model interpretability, and zero-crossing point analysis identified clinically actionable thresholds. Results: Among 223 patients, 200 (89.7%) survived with median ICU stay of 12.2 days for survivors vs. 2.3 days for non-survivors. RandomSurvivalForest achieved the highest performance with td-AUC of 0.97, while CoxPHSurvival and HingeLossSurvivalSVM showed comparable c-indices of 0.87. SHAP analysis identified calcium total and RDW as the strongest mortality predictors. Zero-crossing point analysis established clinical thresholds: calcium total <1.10 mmol/L, RDW >15.07%, sodium <131.68 mmol/L, and pH <7.32 were associated with increased mortality risk, with U-shaped relationships observed for creatinine and lymphocytes. Conclusions: RandomSurvivalForest demonstrated superior time-to-event prediction performance for pediatric sepsis. The survival analysis approach provides dynamic risk assessment and precise timing for clinical interventions. A web-based prediction calculator was developed to facilitate clinical implementation.
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.