6228 AiSEPTRON study: designing a paediatric sepsis prediction tool using machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives Background: Sepsis is a life-threatening and preventable condition that kills children worldwide.1 Predictive models developed from electronic health records (EHR), using artificial intelligence (AI) demonstrated high precision to detect sepsis2 and predict clinical outcomes3 in children attending the emergency department (ED). Objectives We report the performance of ML models to predict the outcomes of serious infection and sepsis in children attending ED. Methods Strategy: Develop a multi-disciplinary AI team, infrastructure and platforms for the extraction, storage and processing of a wide range of EHR variables.4 Study Design: The study was designed as a retrospective, observational study. Participants & Settings: Consecutive children under the age of 16 years that attended ED at the St Thomas’s Hospital, between 1 January 2018 to 31 Dec 2019 were included. Children presenting with trauma/minor injuries were excluded. PREDICTOR VARIABLES: The study used de-identified, routinely collected EHRs. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Patients admitted for intravenous antibiotics > = 48 hours. Figure 1 shows the predictor and outcome variables in detail. Model Building: A supervised ML approach was utilised to create the predictive models. The input data, together with their corresponding outcome labels, were used to train classification models using XGBoost, neural networks and random forests. We incorporated free-text notes from triage using Natural Language Processing using a method called transfer learning. Results A total of 35,414 patient attendances were included in the study. Triage Model: AUC of 0.80 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.83) for the test dataset to predict the need for intravenous antibiotics at triage. Blood Test Model 1: AUC of 0.78 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.82) to predict the need for intravenous antibiotics of any duration. Blood Test Model 2: AUC of 0.73 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.78) to predict the need for admission with intravenous antibiotics > = 48 hours. Figure 2 shows the performance of the 3 main models. Conclusion We pioneered the development of prediction models for sepsis outcomes, applying machine learning and natural language processing to EHRs, for the first time in the UK. We established the infrastructure and platforms for the extraction, storage and processing of multi-centre data, including a collaboration of a strong team of clinical experts, research nurses, data analysts, data scientists and statisticians. We demonstrated high precision in test cohorts to predict the need for intravenous antibiotics from triage, and moderate precision for intravenous antibiotics after blood tests. Further refinement and prospective evaluation is being planned. References Fleischmann-Struzek C, et al, Lancet Respir. Med, 2018. Le S, et al, Front. Pediatr., 2019. Goto T et al, JAMA Netw Open, 2019. AiSEPTRON Study: Designing a Paediatric Sepsis Prediction Tool using Machine Learning, 2023. Available at: http://aiseptron.co.uk (Accessed 01/11/2023).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".