ArticleBMJ open2026
Evaluation of a deep learning model applied to chest X-rays of patients with suspected pneumonia presenting to the emergency department designed to predict admission risk: a retrospective training and prospective non-intervention validation.
Article in BMJ open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop, train and test a deep learning model Image-based PROgnostication applied to Chest X Rays (IPRO-X) tool that predicts the inpatient (IP) admission risk in patients with suspected pneumonia presenting to the emergency department (ED).
designThe study consists of a retrospective (training) and prospective non-interventional shadow deployment (validation) of a deep learning model.
settingThree-hospital tertiary care system with two EDs.
participantsConsecutive adult patients (18 years old or older) who presented to the ED from December 2022 to February 2023 with a chief clinical complaint potentially related to pneumonia were reviewed for eligibility (n=5567), with a final number of 3677 included in the validation study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: IPRO-X was developed using standard two-dimensional convolutional neural network InceptionNet architecture and processes chest radiographs (CXRs) acquired at admission generating a continuous value from 0 (IP-negative) to 1 (IP-positive). We examined IPRO-X's ability to predict IP admission using accuracy, area under the curve (AUC), receiver operating characteristic, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. IPRO-X scores were compared against observed outcomes (admission and discharge) to determine clinical utility in an ED setting. Four thresholds were defined from the retrospective phase: Youden optimal, highest specificity and thresholds equivalent to 30-day mortality rates of Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI) Risk class IV and Confusion, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure and Age 65 or older Score (CRB-65) scores 1 and 2. Performance was also analysed per group of chief complaints.
resultsIn the validation set, 3677 patients (1777 (48%) female, median age 56 years (min 18, max 99)) were included. IPRO-X predicted IP admissions with an AUC of 0.795, and in the pneumonia-specific chief complaints, AUC increased to 0.828, whereas in non-related pneumonia chief complaints, the AUC decreased to 0.755. IPRO-X score was significantly higher in admitted patients compared with discharged patients (p<0.001). The accuracy of IPRO-X when using the PSI-anchored threshold was 0.751 and with the CRB-anchored threshold was 0.729, with a specificity of 0.803 and 0.968, respectively.
conclusionsIPRO-X applied to CXR of patients with signs and symptoms commonly related to pneumonia in the ED can accurately predict IP admission.
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.