Using machine learning and centrifugal microfluidics at the point-of-need to predict clinical deterioration of patients with suspected sepsis within the first 24 h.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sepsis is the bodys dysfunctional response to infection associated with organ failure. Delays in diagnosis have a substantial impact on survival. Herein, samples from 586 in-house patients were used in conjunction with machine learning and cross-validation to narrow a gene expression signature of immune cell reprogramming to predict clinical deterioration in patients with suspected sepsis within the first 24 hours (h) of clinical presentation using just six genes (Sepset). The accuracy of the test (~90% in early intensive care unit (ICU) and 70% in emergency room patients) was validated in 3,178 patients from existing independent cohorts. A real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-based test was shown to have a 98% sensitivity in >230 patients to predict worsening of the sequential organ failure scores or admission to the ICU within the first 24 h following Sepset detection. A stand-alone centrifugal microfluidic instrument that integrates the entire automated workflow for detection of the Sepset classifier in whole blood using digital droplet PCR was developed and tested. This PREcision meDIcine for CriTical care (PREDICT) system had a high sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 89%, and an overall accuracy of 88% in identifying the risk of imminent clinical deterioration in patients with suspected sepsis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".