ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2025
Predictive for patients with pneumonia in pediatric intensive care unit.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blood-based inflammatory parameters and machine learning models for mortality prediction in critically ill pediatric pneumonia: a retrospective cohort study.Translational pediatrics · 2026Article
- Death Prediction Model for Pediatric Pneumonia in ICU: Data to Prognosis.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Pneumonia is globally recognized as a significant disease burden, particularly among pediatric patients in intensive care units (ICU), where its etiology is complex and prognosis often poor. Methods: Data were extracted from a pediatric-specific intensive care (PIC) database, selecting 795 pediatric pneumonia patients in ICUs (2010-2018). After applying rigorous inclusion/exclusion criteria, 543 cases formed the study cohort. We analyzed patient baseline information and 70 laboratory indicators to identify 25 prognosis-associated biomarkers. For prognostic model construction, we used stepwise regression to filter 28 variables, then Spearman and Pearson correlation analyses to identify an intersection of 14 key indicators from the top 20 features. Twelve machine learning algorithms underwent parameter tuning and combination, forming 113 model combinations for survival outcome prediction. Results: The "Stepglm [both] + GBM" combination achieved the highest average accuracy (79.4%) in both training and testing sets. Twelve prognostic variables were identified: WBC Count, Glucose, Neutrophils Count, Cystatin C, Temperature (body), Sodium (Whole Blood), Cholesterol (Total), Absolute Lymphocyte Count, Urea, Lactate, and Bilirubin (Total). Discussion: These 12 variables provide a dependable basis and novel insights for prognostic evaluation, supporting clinical diagnosis, treatment, and early intervention.
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.