Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41973329›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical systems2026

Evaluating Artificial Intelligence for Sepsis Prediction in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.

Yinan Zhang, Tim Kirchler, Audrey P Wang

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical systems, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yinan ZhangDHI Lab, Biomedical Informatics and Digital Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Westmead, NSW, 2145, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-3071-6009
Tim KirchlerDHI Lab, Biomedical Informatics and Digital Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Westmead, NSW, 2145, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-7922-8371
Audrey P WangDHI Lab, Biomedical Informatics and Digital Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Westmead, NSW, 2145, Australia. audrey.wang1@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1230-4357

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aims to synthesize current evidence on artificial intelligence-based sepsis prediction models for emergency department patients and propose practical benchmarks that emphasize standardized data preparation and reproducible model characterization. Literature searches were conducted across Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase. Eligible studies were selected through a two-tiered screening process, followed by data extraction and assessment according to predefined criteria. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to quantify model performance, and heterogeneity was explored by subgroup, regression, and sensitivity analyses. A total of 36 studies comprising 98 predictive models were included, with a pooled area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.86–0.88). Differences in performance were associated with study-level methodologies, including target definition, data provenance, cohort scale, data preprocessing, feature representation, and model development. The integrated meta-regression further identified independent methodologies influencing model performance. Artificial intelligence-based models showed higher pooled predictive performance than widely used traditional scoring systems for sepsis in emergency departments. However, translation into practice remains limited by inconsistent evaluation and reporting, and by inadequate external validation. Standardized methodological benchmarks have the potential to improve reproducibility, comparability, and clinical applicability.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDecision Support Systems, ClinicalEmergency Service, HospitalSepsisHumansPrediction AlgorithmsReproducibility of ResultsArtificial intelligenceClinical decision support systemEmergency medical servicesPrediction modelsSepsis

Identifiers

PMID41973329
PMCPMC13076368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.