ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
An early prediction model of septic shock in patients with Escherichia coli bloodstream infection based on machine learning.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEscherichia coli bloodstream infection (E. coli BSI) is a global clinical challenge with markedly higher mortality once it progresses to septic shock. Current tools are impractical in primary care, creating an urgent clinical need for accessible, laboratory-based early prediction tools. Thus, we developed and validated an interpretable machine learning model using routine laboratory indicators acquired prior to septic shock to predict septic shock in patients with E. coli BSI.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 719 patients with E. coli BSI treated at a tertiary referral center. The cohort was randomly divided into training (n = 503) and test (n = 216) sets. Feature selection was performed using univariate analysis, LASSO regression, and the Boruta algorithm. The chosen final model underwent 10-fold cross-validation, utilizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) as the main metric for discrimination. To account for unequal class sizes, balanced accuracy was used. Bootstrap resampling with replacement was performed on all enrolled patients, alongside external validation, to assess the stability of the final model. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to confirm the model's clinical benefits. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was conducted to strengthen model interpretability.
resultsFive core features were selected as predictive factors: procalcitonin, total protein, chloride, platelet count, and total carbon dioxide. The Extreme Gradient Boosting model achieved the best predictive performance among all candidates, with an AUC of 0.807 in the test set, 0.836 in bootstrap validation, and a balanced accuracy of 0.741. The DCA indicated a substantial clinical net benefit. External validation confirmed the stable predictive efficacy of the model, with a consistent AUC of 0.807. SHAP analysis indicated that procalcitonin and total protein were strongly correlated with the onset of septic shock.
conclusionA robust and interpretable machine learning model constructed using routine laboratory indicators and validated through both bootstrap resampling and external validation was established to predict septic shock in patients with E. coli BSI. This approach provides a convenient and objective tool for risk assessment, enabling timely interventions and potentially improving outcomes in this high-mortality population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42919208What 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.