Cited by 5Sepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentMachine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

1405: ASSESSING CLINICAL USE AND PERFORMANCE OF A MACHINE LEARNING SEPSIS ALERT FOR SEX AND RACIAL BIAS

Abstract

Adams, Roy; Henry, Katharine; Soleimani, Hossein; Rawat, Nishi; Saheed, Mustapha; Chen, Edward; Wu, Albert; Saria, Suchi Author Information

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.ccm.0000811944.77042.17

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Adams, R., Henry, K., Soleimani, H., Rawat, N., Saheed, M., Chen, E., Wu, A., & Saria, S.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
Venue
Critical Care Medicine
Published
2021-12-16
Volume
50
Issue
1
Pages
705-705
ISSN
0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4200415272
Cited by
5
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Critical Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
sepsis alerts, machine learning, algorithmic bias, sex bias, racial bias, clinical implementation, sepsis detection, electronic health records

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review