Articlenpj health systems2026
Improving sepsis best practice utility and clinical acceptance using an LLM-enhanced prediction system.
Article in npj health systems, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Early detection of sepsis is essential for reducing mortality, but diagnosis can be delayed because symptoms of sepsis are often non-specific, frequently mimic other conditions and differ between individuals. We implemented COMPOSER-LLM, an enhanced sepsis prediction system that integrates a large language model (LLM) that analyzes clinical notes to provide contextual support for sepsis risk assessment in two emergency departments within a large academic health system. Using Bayesian causal impact analysis, we evaluated how LLM augmentation influenced nurses' clinical perception of best practice advisory (BPA) relevance, using the rate of BPAs acknowledged as "No Infection Suspected" as a proxy for BPA clinical acceptance. Additionally, a 9 question survey instrument was sent to nurses immediately after the COMPOSER-LLM BPA was fired, in order to assess the perceived utility and impact of the BPA on nursing care. Post-deployment, the rate of "No Infection Suspected" acknowledgements was significantly lower than would be expected based on pre-deployment trends. Survey respondents reported that the COMPOSER-LLM BPA was useful, helped identify at-risk patients who might otherwise be missed, and was generally trusted by nursing staff. Nurses with 0-5 years of experience were significantly more likely than more experienced nurses to believe patients had infection after an BPA and to feel the BPA increased their expectation that a patient would develop sepsis, while no other significant experience-based differences were observed.
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.