ArticleScientific reports2026
Evaluating the generalisability of LiSep LSTM for early prediction of septic shock across US and european cohorts.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sepsis remains a major public health concern and is associated with high mortality. Early detection and timely intervention are critical for improving outcomes, yet no standardised approach has been universally adopted. The LiSep LSTM model, a Long Short-Term Memory neural network developed using the MIMIC-III database, has demonstrated promising predictive performance but generalisability across regions has not yet been explored. This study evaluated the LiSep LSTM model in an independent European cohort from the AmsterdamUMC (AUMC) database. Model performance was assessed using internal, external, and pooled validation to examine the effects of distributional shift and data heterogeneity across cohorts. Permutation feature importance (PFI) was further applied to quantify each feature's contribution to model performance across evaluation settings. When tested on the AUMC cohort, the model achieved an Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUROC) of 0.8851 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8612-0.909) with a median Hours Before Onset (HBO) of 47.0 hours (interquartile range [IQR]: 16.0-255.0), slightly outperforming its performance on MIMIC-III. External validation showed reduced calibration and recall, while pooled training improved AUROC and Brier score relative to external-only evaluation. Accuracy was moderate (0.60-0.77) and precision remained low (0.01-0.17), indicating a substantial false-positive burden. These findings suggest that pooled training enhances robustness and supports earlier identification of septic shock, but local calibration and strategies to manage false alarms remain necessary for reliable deployment.
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.