ArticleJournal of Korean biological nursing science2026
Development of a machine learning-based sepsis prediction model for real-world clinical settings in South Korea: a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Journal of Korean biological nursing science, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to develop a predictive model for the early identification of patients at risk of sepsis, using routinely available clinical information and laboratory test results collected during the initial phase of patient care. Methods: This retrospective analysis included electronic medical records of 22,400 adult patients who presented with suspected infection to a tertiary care university hospital in Korea between January 2013 and May 2024. Patients were classified according to Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (score ≥ 2) or Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (score ≥ 2), in combination with sepsis-related International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision codes. Four different machine learning models were trained and validated using five-fold cross-validation. In addition, Shapley additive explanations analysis was performed to interpret the contribution and clinical relevance of key predictive variables. Results: Among the evaluated models, CatBoost demonstrated the strongest predictive performance. Notably, platelet distribution width, alveolar-arterial oxygen difference, procalcitonin, and the arterial/alveolar oxygen ratio consistently emerged as major predictors. Importantly, several variables that did not reach statistical significance in univariate analysis nevertheless contributed substantially to overall model performance, highlighting the importance of complex, multidimensional interactions among clinical factors. Conclusion: These findings indicate that a model based on simple, routinely collected clinical data can achieve high predictive accuracy and strong generalizability. Such a tool may support early clinical decision-making by multidisciplinary teams, including nurses, across diverse real-world care settings. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate its clinical utility and to assess its potential effects on patient outcomes.
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.