The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Predictive Models of Sepsis in Adult ICU Patients
Abstract
Sepsis is a dysregulated systemic response to infection that causes organ dysfunction. It is the leading cause of in-hospital mortality and is responsible for the longest, most expensive, hospital stays in the United States. Prognostic modeling of sepsis has demonstrated potential for improving treatment and outcomes for critical care patients. However, the majority of previous models have relied on an outdated definition of sepsis based on systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). Therefore, this study sought to build predictive models of sepsis using the most recent definition of sepsis, Sepsis-3. A total of three classification methods, including logistic regression (LR), support vector machines (SVM), and logistic model trees (LMT), were used to predict onset of sepsis in adult Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients using vital signs and blood culture results. For patients who did not develop sepsis, predictor values were selected from a random 48-hour time window during the patient's ICU stay. For those who developed sepsis, a random time was selected for the patient within 48 to 6 hours prior to onset of sepsis, and the predictor values with the closest preceding time were extracted. The LMT produced superior classification performance compared with the LR and SVM. The wide time window used for data extraction improves the clinical utility of the models relative to those built in previous work. However, while the models showed similar sensitivity and specificity to pr…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Numerous models were tested on the freely accessible MIMIC database.
“numerous models were tested on the freely accessible MIMIC database [27, 33, 52–59]”
From Machine learning for the prediction of sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (2020) · cites this paper as [57]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 12 · Cited by 20
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- 10.1016/S0011-3840(97)80011-1 · DOI
- 10.1097/00003246-200107000-00002 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1186/s13613-016-0204-y · DOI
- alberti, 2003, Influence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome and sepsis on outcome of critically ill infected patients Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 168, 77
- 10.1038/sdata.2016.35 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1097/00003246-199804000-00032 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00134-005-0039-8 · DOI
- 10.1056/NEJMoa1415236 · DOI
- 10.1164/rccm.201504-0781OC · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2196/medinform.5909 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1001/jama.2016.0287 · DOI · Paper page
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, R. Z., Sun, C. H., Schroeder, P. H., Ameko, M. K., Moore, C. C., & Barnes, L. E.
- Venue
- 2018 IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2018-06
- Pages
- 390-391
- OpenAlex
- W2883607909
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 31.94
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI) (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 › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- sepsis prediction, Sepsis-3, intensive care unit patients, adult critical care, vital signs, logistic model tree, support vector machine, logistic regression, false positive rate
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