MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4380873606 · doi:10.1101/2023.06.14.23291343

Prediction models for post-discharge mortality among under-five children with suspected sepsis in Uganda: A multicohort analysis

2023· preprint· en· W4380873606 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Matthew O. Wiens, Vuong Nguyen, Jeffrey N. Bone, Elias Kumbakumba, Stephen Businge, Abner Tagoola, Sheila Oyella Sherine, Emmanuel Byaruhanga, Edward Ssemwanga, Celestine Barigye, Jesca Nsungwa, Charles Olaro, J. Mark Ansermino, Niranjan Kissoon, Joel Singer, Charles P. Larson, Pascal M. Lavoie, Dustin Dunsmuir, Peter P. Moschovis, Stefanie K. Novakowski, Clare Komugisha, Mellon Tayebwa, Douglas Mwesigwa, Nicholas West, Martina Knappett, Nathan Kenya‐Mugisha, Jerome Kabakyenga

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersGrand Challenges CanadaBC Children's HospitalChildren's Hospital FoundationThrasher Research Fund
KeywordsMedicineReceiver operating characteristicPediatricsProspective cohort studySepsisSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background In many low-income countries, more than five percent of hospitalized children die following hospital discharge. The identification of those at risk has limited progress to improve outcomes. We aimed to develop algorithms to predict post-discharge mortality among children admitted with suspected sepsis. Methods Four prospective cohort studies were conducted at six hospitals in Uganda between 2012 and 2021. Death occurring within six months of discharge was the primary outcome. Separate models were developed for children 0-6 months of age and for those 6-60 months of age, based on candidate predictors collected at admission. Within each age group, three models were derived, each with a maximum of eight variables based on variable importance. Deriving parsimonious models with different sets of predictors was prioritized to improve usability and support implementation in settings where some data elements are unavailable. All models were internally validated using 10-fold cross validation. Findings 8,810 children were prospectively enrolled, of whom 470 died in hospital and 161 (1·9%) were lost to follow-up; 257 (7·7%) and 233 (4·8%) post-discharge deaths occurred in the 0-6-month and 6-60-month age groups, respectively. The primary models had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0·77 (95%CI 0·74-0·80) for 0-6-month-olds and 0·75 (95%CI 0·72-0·79) for 6-60-month-olds; mean AUROCs among the 10 cross-validation folds were 0·75 and 0·73, respectively. Calibration across risk strata were good with Brier scores of 0·07 and 0·04, respectively. The most important variables included anthropometry and oxygen saturation. Additional variables included duration of illness, jaundice-age interaction, and a bulging fontanelle among 0-6-month-olds; and prior admissions, coma score, temperature, age-respiratory rate interaction, and HIV status among 6-60-month-olds. Interpretation Simple prediction models at admission with suspected sepsis can identify children at risk of post-discharge mortality. Further external validation is recommended for different contexts. Models can be integrated into existing processes to improve peri-discharge care as children transition from the hospital to the community. Funding Grand Challenges Canada (#TTS-1809-1939), Thrasher Research Fund (#13878), BC Children’s Hospital Foundation, and Mining4Life.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→