ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Prediction models for encephalitis and in-hospital death associated with severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development and validation of an interpretable machine learning model for the early diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundSevere fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS) is an emerging infectious disease associated with encephalitis and high in-hospital death rates. This study aimed to develop and validate two predictive models for the early identification of encephalitis and prevention of in-hospital death in SFTS patients.
methodsThis retrospective study included SFTS patients admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine between January 2017 and July 2024. To construct the prediction models, we utilized least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) coupled with logistic regression, subsequently presenting the results through a comprehensive nomogram. The performance of the models was rigorously evaluated across multiple dimensions: discrimination ability was measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), calibration accuracy was assessed through calibration curves and Brier scores, and clinical applicability was determined using decision curve analysis (DCA) and a clinical impact curve (CIC).
resultsThe analysis of data from 196 SFTS patients revealed significant clinical outcomes, with an in-hospital death rate of 16.84% (33 patients) and an encephalitis incidence rate of 45.41% (89 patients). The in-hospital death prediction model and the encephalitis prediction model demonstrated robust performance, achieving AUROCs of 0.935 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.884-0.986) and 0.895 (95% CI: 0.839-0.952), respectively. Additionally, the Brier scores for these models were 0.066 and 0.120, respectively, indicating a high level of accuracy in their predictions. The DCA and CIC further revealed that both models achieved a relatively greater net benefit, suggesting their potential clinical applicability. Notably, age and ferritin levels were identified as the most significant variables coselected by both models, highlighting their importance in predicting outcomes.
conclusionThe predictive models developed in this study demonstrated robust performance in predicting both in-hospital death and encephalitis incidence among SFTS patients. Notably, age and ferritin levels emerged as significant independent risk factors, showing strong associations with both clinical outcomes.
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.