Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42827729›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026

Interpretable admission-stage machine learning for early Sepsis-3 identification in the emergency department.

Fulden Cantaş Türkiş, Buğra Varol

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Fulden Cantaş TürkişDivision of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Türkiye.
Buğra VarolDivision of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/objectives: Artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support systems have emerged as promising tools for improving early sepsis recognition in emergency departments. This study aimed to develop and evaluate interpretable machine learning models for identifying Sepsis-3-defined sepsis using routinely available admission-stage variables and to compare their performance with conventional biomarkers and the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS). Methods: This secondary analysis used a publicly available prospective cohort of 1,572 adult emergency department patients with suspected community-onset sepsis. The outcome was Sepsis-3-defined sepsis. Thirteen demographic, physiological, and laboratory admission variables were evaluated. Following a stratified 70:30 train-test split, missing data were handled using multivariate imputation by chained equations, and feature selection was performed using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator logistic regression. Penalized logistic regression (LR), Explainable Boosting Machine (EBM), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), and Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM) models were developed using five-fold cross-validation. Performance was evaluated by discrimination, classification, calibration, decision curve analysis, and explainability. Results: Among 1,572 adult patients, 560 met the Sepsis-3 criteria. In the internal holdout test set, AUROC values were 0.753 (LR), 0.763 (XGBoost), 0.767 (LightGBM), and 0.766 (EBM). Conventional biomarkers and SIRS showed lower discrimination (AUROC 0.599-0.693), whereas a biomarker-only logistic regression model achieved an AUROC of 0.710. No significant AUROC differences were observed among the machine learning models. LightGBM achieved the numerically highest AUROC and accuracy, whereas EBM achieved the highest sensitivity (0.845). Age, procalcitonin, oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio were the most influential predictors. Conclusions: Interpretable machine learning models based on routinely available emergency department admission variables provided moderate discrimination, clinically relevant sensitivity, and transparent predictor effects for identifying Sepsis-3-defined sepsis. Compared with conventional biomarkers, SIRS, and a biomarker-only logistic regression model, the machine learning models generally showed higher discrimination, although the magnitude and statistical significance of these differences varied across comparators. External validation is required before clinical implementation.

Indexed as

clinical classification modelclinical decision supportemergency departmentexplainable artificial intelligenceinterpretable machine learningsepsis

Identifiers

PMID42827729
PMCPMC13630677

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.