Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42242239›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2026

A Novel Digital Phenotype for Burn Sepsis: Leveraging Electronic Health Record Data and Natural Language Processing to Improve Case Definition.

Nicholas D Soulakis, Lily Li, Ashley A Peters, John C Kubasiak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Nicholas D SoulakisLoyola University Chicago, Department of Health Informatics and Data Science, Parkinson School of Health Sciences and Public Health, Illinois, United States, Maywood.
Lily LiLoyola University Chicago, Center for Health Outcomes and Informatics Research, Illinois, United States, Chicago.ORCID 0009-0009-7415-4356
Ashley A PetersBurn and Shock Trauma Institute, Loyola University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Illinois, United States, Maywood.
John C KubasiakBurn and Shock Trauma Institute, Loyola University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Illinois, United States, Maywood.ORCID 0000-0003-1446-3391

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Sepsis remains a leading cause of death for burn patients, yet the condition is hard to spot early. Hospitals generally rely on the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for surveillance, but these codes are assigned late and often miss active cases. Objectives: We developed and validated a scalable, electronic health record (EHR)-based digital phenotype that improves identification of burn-related sepsis compared with ICD codes alone. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult burn inpatients ( Results: ICD coding alone classified 79 encounters (5.8%) as sepsis. EHR-enhanced algorithms identified more cases: 123 via SOFA + antibiotics (9.0%), 21 via SOFA + blood culture (1.5%), and 53 via SOFA + any culture (3.9%). The rule count score (0-4) achieved the highest performance (area under the curve [AUC] 0.92), outperforming ICD codes alone (AUC 0.77). Conclusion: Our multimodal digital phenotype doubled sepsis detection compared to ICD-based surveillance. The tiered risk assessment approach showed excellent discrimination with increasing positive predictive value as more criteria were met. This phenotype can be implemented using routine EHR data, supporting early warning tools for this high-risk population.

Indexed as

BurnsElectronic Health RecordsNatural Language ProcessingSepsisAdultFemaleHumansInternational Classification of DiseasesMaleMiddle AgedPhenotypeRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID42242239
PMCPMC13290366

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.