ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Toward precision risk stratification: predicting in-hospital death in sepsis patients with MRSA bacteremia.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with sepsis and concurrent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bloodstream infection face a substantial risk of mortality. This study aimed to develop and validate a pragmatic, interpretable prediction model for in-hospital mortality in this high-risk population. We conducted a retrospective, single-center cohort study including 1,605 eligible patients, who were randomly divided into a training set (n = 1,124) and a validation set (n = 481). A rigorous, multi-stage feature selection pipeline—integrating univariate analysis, multi-model machine learning importance assessment, the Boruta algorithm, and stability selection via LASSO—was applied to 64 candidate variables. This process identified seven parsimonious, clinically accessible predictors: Glasgow Coma Scale score, minimum pH, maximum blood urea nitrogen, minimum white blood cell count, minimum platelet count, maximum lactate level, and the presence of pneumonia. Among six compared machine learning algorithms, logistic regression was selected for its optimal balance of performance and inherent interpretability. The final model demonstrated strong discriminative ability, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.861 (95% CI: 0.840–0.882) in the training set and 0.844 (95% CI: 0.811–0.877) in the independent validation set, and showed good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow test p = 0.274). Decision curve analysis confirmed superior clinical net benefit across a wide range of risk thresholds. The model maintained robust and equitable performance across key patient subgroups and exhibited stability in extensive sensitivity analyses, including multiple imputation and bootstrap internal validation. This interpretable, seven-variable logistic regression model provides a clinically actionable tool for early mortality risk stratification, potentially supporting timely and tailored intervention strategies for sepsis patients with MRSA bacteremia.
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.