↓ Skip to main content

Development and validation of a diagnostic model for early differentiation of sepsis and non-infectious SIRS in critically ill children - a data-driven approach using machine-learning algorithms

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
214 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development and validation of a diagnostic model for early differentiation of sepsis and non-infectious SIRS in critically ill children - a data-driven approach using machine-learning algorithms
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12887-018-1082-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Florian Lamping, Thomas Jack, Nicole Rübsamen, Michael Sasse, Philipp Beerbaum, Rafael T. Mikolajczyk, Martin Boehne, André Karch

Abstract

Since early antimicrobial therapy is mandatory in septic patients, immediate diagnosis and distinction from non-infectious SIRS is essential but hampered by the similarity of symptoms between both entities. We aimed to develop a diagnostic model for differentiation of sepsis and non-infectious SIRS in critically ill children based on routinely available parameters (baseline characteristics, clinical/laboratory parameters, technical/medical support). This is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial conducted at a German tertiary-care pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Two hundred thirty-eight cases of non-infectious SIRS and 58 cases of sepsis (as defined by IPSCC criteria) were included. We applied a Random Forest approach to identify the best set of predictors out of 44 variables measured at the day of onset of the disease. The developed diagnostic model was validated in a temporal split-sample approach. A model including four clinical (length of PICU stay until onset of non-infectious SIRS/sepsis, central line, core temperature, number of non-infectious SIRS/sepsis episodes prior to diagnosis) and four laboratory parameters (interleukin-6, platelet count, procalcitonin, CRP) was identified in the training dataset. Validation in the test dataset revealed an AUC of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.70-0.87). Our model was superior to previously proposed biomarkers such as CRP, interleukin-6, procalcitonin or a combination of CRP and procalcitonin (maximum AUC = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.52-0.74). When aiming at a complete identification of sepsis cases (100%; 95% CI: 87-100%), 28% (95% CI: 20-38%) of non-infectious SIRS cases were assorted correctly. Our approach allows early recognition of sepsis with an accuracy superior to previously described biomarkers, and could potentially reduce antibiotic use by 30% in non-infectious SIRS cases. External validation studies are necessary to confirm the generalizability of our approach across populations and treatment practices. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00209768; registration date: September 21, 2005.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 214 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 214 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Student > Bachelor 16 7%
Other 15 7%
Student > Master 14 7%
Other 36 17%
Unknown 85 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 5%
Computer Science 10 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 27 13%
Unknown 94 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,557,505
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#1,990
of 3,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,681
of 335,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#72
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,143 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,791 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.