ArticleScientific reports2025
Ability of the hypotension prediction index to predict hypotension in patients with septic shock in the intensive care unit.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Effects of early use of norepinephrine combined with esmolol on hemodynamic stability and 28-day mortality in patients with septic shock.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Predictive vs. Flow-Derived Haemodynamic Monitoring in Major Abdominal Surgery: Associations with Intraoperative Hypotension and Postoperative Outcomes.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Observational
- Response to "Reflection on the Integration of Artificial Intelligence in Anaesthesiology: Beyond Algorithmic Performance".Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The hypotension prediction index (HPI) is a machine learning-based model for predicting hypotension. It provides good performance for predicting intraoperative hypotension but has rarely been studied in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). This prospective study aimed to determine the ability of HPI to predict hypotension in ICU-admitted patients with septic shock. Hypotension was defined as a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of < 65 mmHg ≥ 1 min. Non-hypotensive events included MAP > 75 and ≥ 65 mmHg for the primary and secondary objectives, respectively. Positive events were selected at 5, 10, and 15-min before hypotension. Thirty patients with septic shock (293,315 data points) were included; 645 hypotensive events occurred, with a median of 14.5 [8-31] events/patient and a median time of 3.2 [2.5-4] min. At 5 and 10 min before hypotension, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of HPI was significantly higher than at 15 min (0.953 vs. 0.919, p = 0.002 and 0.934 vs. 0.919, p = 0.01, respectively). HPI at 5, 10, and 15 min before the events showed better performance than other hemodynamic variables. However, after including MAP 65-75 mmHg as a non-hypotensive event, the ability of HPI declined and was similar to that of current MAP for predicting hypotension at all time points (AUC 0.817 vs. 0.786, p = 0.28 for 5 min, 0.787 vs. 0.761, p = 0.4 for 10 min, and 0.753 vs. 0.720, p = 0.31 for 15 min before the event). HPI showed excellent performance in predicting hypotension in septic shock patients in the ICU. However, its ability decreased when MAP 65-75 mmHg was considered non-hypotension. The HPI algorithm requires revisions to improve its predictive ability.
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.