ArticleScientific reports2026
On the usage of artificial intelligence for identifying main attributes and predicting neonatal sepsis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During the neonatal period, newborns are more susceptible to developing conditions and diseases due to their fragility of the transition and adaptation to the extrauterine environment. Neonatal sepsis is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in newborns, particularly among preterm and low birth weight infants, requiring early diagnosis to reduce complications and deaths. In this work, we evaluate the performance of artificial intelligence models in predicting neonatal sepsis and also identify the attributes that most contribute impact on models' learning and their relationship with the disease, using real data from the state of Pernambuco, Brazil. The six machine learning models evaluated were AdaBoost, CatBoost, Gradient Boosting, LightGBM, Random Forest and XGBoost. Performance metrics ranged from 0.7213 to 0.8548, with AdaBoost and LightGBM achieving the best results, reaching a sensitivity above 0.8197 and a specificity of 0.8397 in all three experiments. SHAPley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis revealed strong relationships between sepsis and attributes such as intracranial hemorrhage, prematurity, CPAP use, TTN presence, and epicutaneous access, all of which were highly associated with sepsis cases. We conclude that the artificial intelligence models demonstrated promising results in predicting neonatal sepsis, highlighting critical clinical attributes associated with the disease and identifying the most relevant predictors.
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.