ArticleJournal of intensive medicine2026
Development and external validation of a machine learning model for predicting the 28-day mortality risk in patients with sepsis complicated by acute respiratory failure in the ICU.
Article in Journal of intensive medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence Models for Mortality and Outcome Prediction in Intensive Care Unit Sepsis: A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sepsis complicated by acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a common and severe condition among patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), associated with high mortality. Accurate prediction of short-term outcomes is crucial for optimizing clinical decisions and treatment strategies. Therefore, we aimed to develop and validate an interpretable machine learning (ML) model to predict the 28-day mortality risk in ICU patients with sepsis complicated by ARF. Methods: This retrospective study included ICU patients with sepsis complicated by ARF from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV, v3.1) database as the training cohort, and patients from the eICU-CRD (v2.0) database as the external validation cohort. Candidate predictors were initially identified based on clinical guidelines and expert consensus, and the Boruta algorithm was applied to determine the optimal feature set. Seven ML algorithms, namely random forest, XGBoost, logistic regression, AdaBoost, gradient boosting, CatBoost, and neural network, were compared. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. To enhance interpretability, feature importance was assessed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis. These results were integrated to construct a practical prognostic prediction platform. Results: The training cohort (2975 deaths) comprised 12,597 ICU patients with sepsis complicated by ARF from the MIMIC-IV (v3.1) database, while 890 patients from the eICU-CRD (v2.0) database (102 deaths) were included for external validation. Among the ML models, XGBoost achieved the best performance in the training cohort (AUC: 0.812; accuracy: 0.772; sensitivity: 0.605; specificity: 0.823). In the external validation cohort, XGBoost demonstrated good generalizability (AUC: 0.714). SHAP analysis identified PaO₂, alanine aminotransferase, albumin, age, Acute Physiology Score (APS) III, lactate, urine output, and respiratory rate as the most influential predictors of 28-day mortality. Accordingly, a short-term mortality prediction platform was developed. Conclusions: We successfully developed an efficient, interpretable predictive model based on the XGBoost algorithm, accurately predicting 28-day mortality risk for ICU patients with sepsis complicated by ARF. Demonstrating stable performance and strong generalizability, this model holds promise as a clinical decision-support tool for the early identification of high-risk patients and optimization of personalized treatments.
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.