ArticleFrontiers in immunology2024
Developing and validating a machine learning model to predict multidrug-resistant
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning for dysphagia risk prediction in older adults after acute ischemic stroke.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Machine Learning Model for Predicting Multidrug Resistance in ClinicalDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Hyper-inflammation and immunosuppression: redefining sepsis therapy using modern approaches.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Postoperative enteral nutrition timing and risk variation in elderly patients with perforated peptic ulcer.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Development of a predictive model using automated machine learning for Carbapenem-resistant Organisms (CRO) infections in hospitalized patients.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Bug Wars: Artificial Intelligence Strikes Back in Sepsis Management.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
Background: Multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (MDR-KP) infections pose a significant global healthcare challenge, particularly due to the high mortality risk associated with septic shock. This study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning-based model to predict the risk of MDR-KP-associated septic shock, enabling early risk stratification and targeted interventions. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 1,385 patients with MDR-KP infections admitted between January 2019 and June 2024. The cohort was randomly divided into a training set (n = 969) and a validation set (n = 416). Feature selection was performed using LASSO regression and the Boruta algorithm. Seven machine learning algorithms were evaluated, with logistic regression chosen for its optimal balance between performance and robustness against overfitting. Results: The overall incidence of MDR-KP-associated septic shock was 16.32% (226/1,385). The predictive model identified seven key risk factors: procalcitonin (PCT), sepsis, acute kidney injury, intra-abdominal infection, use of vasoactive medications, ventilator weaning failure, and mechanical ventilation. The logistic regression model demonstrated excellent predictive performance, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.906 in the training set and 0.865 in the validation set. Calibration was robust, with Hosmer-Lemeshow test results of Conclusion: This study presents a validated, high-performing predictive model for MDR-KP-associated septic shock, offering a valuable tool for early clinical decision-making. Prospective, multi-center studies are recommended to further evaluate its clinical applicability and effectiveness in diverse settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.