ReviewFrontiers in medicine2026
Progress in sepsis prediction models: from traditional scoring systems to multimodal intelligence and clinical translation.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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.
- Predicting Hospital Length of Stay in Orthopedic Trauma Patients Using Fracture-Specific Machine Learning Models: A Multicenter Retrospective Prediction-Modeling Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- RXRα suppression drives hepatic metabolic and immune dysfunction in sepsis.EMBO molecular medicine · 2026Article
- Early prediction of renal replacement therapy within 24 hours after septic shock recognition in the emergency department using machine learning: a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected multicenter registry.BMC emergency medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sepsis is a leading cause of mortality and healthcare expenditures among patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Its pathophysiology is complex and its clinical manifestations are highly heterogeneous; early identification and timely, targeted interventions are essential to improving outcomes. With the widespread adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) and the rapid expansion of critical care data, developing sepsis prediction models using machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) has become an active area of research. This review provides a systematic overview of advances in sepsis prediction, from clinical problem framing and outcome definitions to data sources, feature engineering, and methodological evolution. We summarize the progression from traditional scoring systems (e.g., SOFA, qSOFA) to modern ML algorithms (e.g., gradient boosting trees, random forests) and time series DL models (e.g., LSTM, Transformer models). We also outline reporting and evaluation standards (e.g., TRIPOD AI), and synthesize evidence on representative models for early warning, prognostic risk stratification, and prediction of organ dysfunction. Key translational challenges are discussed, including generalization, fairness, model drift, workflow integration, alarm fatigue, and real world utility. Finally, we highlight opportunities in multimodal data fusion, causal inference, federated learning, and digital twins for building next generation, clinically actionable sepsis intelligence, and we offer practical recommendations to help move from algorithmic accuracy to demonstrable clinical value, emphasizing that only models that are externally validated, well calibrated, prospectively evaluated, and tightly aligned with clinical workflows are likely to improve patient outcomes.
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.