ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Integration of metabolic parameters with SOFA score for mortality risk assessment in elderly sepsis: a derivation study.
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.
- [Special ethical aspects in older intensive care patients].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2026Article
- Article
- Multi-Omics Reveals Dysregulation of the Endosome-Lysosome-Autophagy Axis and Immune-Inflammatory Imbalance in Elderly Sepsis.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Article
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
backgroundSepsis mortality remains elevated among elderly populations, yet existing risk stratification tools demonstrate suboptimal predictive accuracy. We explored whether incorporating metabolic parameters into the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score could enhance prognostic discrimination in this vulnerable cohort.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed 4,056 elderly sepsis patients (age ≥ 65 years) admitted to intensive care units between 2008 and 2019, identified through ICD coding from the MIMIC-IV database. Random forest-based feature selection and SHAP value analysis identified lactate and bicarbonate as influential mortality predictors. We constructed three nested logistic regression models: Model 1 (SOFA alone), Model 2 (SOFA plus lactate), and Model 3 (SOFA plus lactate and bicarbonate). Multiple imputation addressed missing data. Model performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), net reclassification improvement (NRI), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis. Restricted cubic spline regression characterized nonlinear mortality associations.
resultsTwenty-eight-day mortality occurred in 1,259 patients (31%). Model 3 achieved superior discrimination (AUC 0.785, 95% CI 0.770-0.801) compared to SOFA alone (AUC 0.738, 95% CI 0.722-0.754; difference 0.048, P < 0.001). Compared with Model 1, Model 3 demonstrated substantial reclassification improvement (NRI 0.816, 95% CI 0.733-0.893; IDI 0.077, 95% CI 0.072-0.082; both P < 0.001), with balanced gains in event (NRI + 0.401) and non-event (NRI - 0.415) classification. Sensitivity increased from 0.32 to 0.45 while maintaining comparable specificity (0.91 vs. 0.90). Restricted cubic spline analysis revealed nonlinear threshold effects, with mortality risk accelerating sharply beyond SOFA scores of approximately 8 points. Decision curve analysis confirmed clinical utility across relevant threshold probabilities.
conclusionsIntegrating lactate and bicarbonate measurements with SOFA scoring demonstrated improved mortality discrimination in elderly sepsis patients. These hypothesis-generating findings from a single-center derivation cohort require prospective multicenter validation before clinical implementation can be considered. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.