ArticlePLOS global public health2026
Prospective economic evaluation of a predictive artificial intelligence model for sepsis: Effects on hospital costs and return on investment.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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
Early sepsis detection is essential for improving outcomes and reducing costs, but traditional rule-based systems have limited accuracy and real-world evidence for machine-learning alternatives remains scarce. In this context, BIAlert-Sepsis predicts sepsis risk within 24 hours using historical hospital data, and evaluating its implementation in a tertiary hospital setting provides an opportunity to quantify its clinical benefits and economic value. We conducted a retrospective quasi-experimental before-after study including all septic patients admitted from January 2011 to June 2024. The baseline period (Jan 2011 - Mar 2019) was compared with the AI implementation period (Apr 2019 - June 2024), excluding the COVID-19 interval. Outcomes were assessed using adjusted generalized linear models and interrupted time series regression. A hospital-perspective economic evaluation incorporated implementation and maintenance costs, and a 5-year model estimated net benefit and return on investment (ROI), supported by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. A total of 8,039 patients were included (6,168 baseline period; 1,871 AI period). Demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable across periods. During the AI period, ICU admissions decreased from 34.4% to 30.4% (adjusted p = 0.001), accompanied by significant reductions of 0.35 ICU days and 0.59 ward days per patient. Mean admission costs declined from 26,517€ to 24,630€ (adjusted p = 0.005). After covariate adjustment, AI implementation was associated with a 26.1-31.1% reduction in mean admission costs across GLM models. Interrupted time series analysis identified a modest immediate cost level change after AI implementation and a larger sustained decline during the post-COVID period. The 5-year economic model projected a cumulative discounted net benefit of 3.55M€ and a 528% ROI. BIAlert-Sepsis was associated with favourable clinical outcomes and lower costs, with economic modelling suggesting early breakeven and positive financial returns.
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.