Observational studyCritical care (London, England)2026
Clinical subphenotypes of sepsis based on mixed continuous and categorical data and differences in treatment effects: a cluster analysis of multicenter observational studies.
Observational study in Critical care (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSepsis is a heterogeneous syndrome; therefore, identifying subphenotypes is essential to determine the optimal treatment for each patient. Previous studies have mainly analyzed continuous variables and focused on the treatment effects in patient cohorts receiving a single intervention. In this study, we explored subphenotypes using mixed continuous and categorical data and examined multiple treatment effects for each subphenotype.
methodsWe used Fifty-two admission variables from two multicenter registries—the Tohoku Sepsis Registry and Focused Outcomes Research in Emergency Care for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Sepsis, and Trauma study—which enrolled patients aged 16 years or older with sepsis admitted to intensive care units in Japan. Cluster analysis was conducted using methods for mixed data (i.e., datasets containing both continuous and categorical variables): k-UMAP, which applies k-means clustering after dimensionality reduction via Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP); k-prototype; and KAMILA (KAymeans for MIxed Large data). We evaluated the stability of clustering methods and determined the optimal number of clusters using consensus clustering. Based on stable clustering results, we examined the interaction effects between treatments and subphenotypes after applying inverse probability of treatment weighting in logistic regression analysis. The outcome measure was in-hospital mortality.
resultsThe analysis included 1,756 patients. We selected the three most stable clustering results: two from k-UMAP, and one from KAMILA. Hospital mortality, patient characteristics, and treatment effectiveness varied among these subphenotypes. Significant treatment effects were observed in the k-UMAP models: the odds ratio (OR) for recombinant thrombomodulin was 0.37 (95%CI 0.13–0.80) in subphenotype 1 when classifying three subphenotypes. The OR for antithrombin III was 0.49 (95%CI 0.20–0.93) in subphenotype 2 when classifying five subphenotypes. No KAMILA-derived subphenotype showed a significant treatment effect. No adjustment for multiple comparisons was applied because these were exploratory analyses.
conclusionsUsing three clustering methods on mixed-data sepsis cohorts, we identified three to five clinically distinct subphenotypes with heterogeneous treatment responses. Our findings suggest that k-UMAP may identify novel subphenotypes that could help reveal potential treatment targets not yet proven effective.
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.