ArticleBioMed research international2026
Risk Factors for Sepsis and Pulmonary Embolism Mortality in Burn Patients by Using a Competing Risk Model: A Machine Learning Approach.
Article in BioMed research international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Risk Factors for Sepsis and Pulmonary Embolism Mortality in Burn Patients by Using a Competing Risk Model: A Machine Learning Approach.BioMed research international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSevere burn injury remains a prevalent cause of morbidity and mortality over the last several decades. Various potential complications significantly contribute to mortality in burn patients. Sepsis and pulmonary embolism (PE) are among the leading causes of death following burn injury.
methodsThis retrospective study was conducted at a burn center in southwest Iran. In the current study, competing risk analysis was performed. Two events were considered death due to PE, which is the event of interest, and the competing event defined as death due to sepsis. Discharge was considered as a censor. Hazard ratios (HR) and standard errors (SE) were used to estimate the risk of death.
resultsThe study included 623 patients, with a total of 458 deaths (73.5%). Among them, 17 (2.7%) were due to PE, and 441 (70.8%) were attributed to sepsis-related mortality. Lower limb burns were the most frequent injury site among survivors (77.0%) and PE cases (82.3%). Flame burns were the most common etiology in all groups. The need for mechanical ventilation is also associated within increasing hazard of mortality in both events. Patients with burns in the lower limbs are more likely to die from PE (HR = 3.15) and sepsis (HR = 2.10). A higher RBC count was associated with a decreased risk of mortality from both PE (HR: 0.66) and sepsis (HR: 0.53). Similarly, hemoglobin levels had a modest protective effect against both causes of death.
conclusionThese results highlight the complex relationship between burn characteristics, laboratory indicators, and demographic factors in determining mortality risk. Both clinical and laboratory parameters, as well as burn site and severity, play important roles in predicting outcomes in burn patients.
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.