SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Application of machine learning for the diagnosis and prognosis of sepsis-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sepsis is a critical condition that can lead to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), resulting from both pulmonary and extrapulmonary etiologies. This systematic review evaluates the application of machine learning (ML) approaches for the early diagnosis and prognosis of ARDS in sepsis patients. Methods:This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis, focusing on studies that employ machine learning to forecast the incidence and outcomes of acute respiratory distress syndrome in adult sepsis patients. Databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were queried for relevant studies. The quality of the eligible study was assessed, and the diagnostic accuracy data was retrieved. Results: A total of 11 studies were incorporated into the meta-analysis. The aggregated sensitivity for diagnostic models was 0.76(95% CI:0.75 to 0.77), whilst the aggregated specificity was 0.70(95% CI:0.69 to 0.71). Prognostic models demonstrated a combined sensitivity of 0.74(95% CI:0.72 to 0.75) and specificity of 0.72(95% CI:0.71 to 0.74). The areas under the curve for these models were 0.821(95% CI:0.781 to 0.861) and 0.793(95% CI:0.767 to 0.819). Conclusions: These findings indicate the potential utility of machine learning in improving the early diagnosis and prognosis of ARDS in septic patients. However, further study is required to substantiate these findings and to investigate the incorporation of machine learning methods in practical clinical environments. Trial Registration: The review protocol was registered and approved on the International Prospective Statistical Review Registry (PROSPERO) prior to the start of the study on 23rd June 2025(CRD420251079338).
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.