A machine learning and centrifugal microfluidics platform for bedside prediction of sepsis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysfunctional response to infection. Delays in diagnosis have substantial impact on survival. Herein, blood samples from 586 in-house patients with suspected sepsis are used in conjunction with machine learning and cross-validation to define a six-gene expression signature of immune cell reprogramming, termed Sepset, to predict clinical deterioration within the first 24 h (h) of clinical presentation. Prediction accuracy (~90% in early intensive care unit (ICU) and 70% in emergency room patients) is validated in 3178 patients from existing independent cohorts. A RT-PCR-based Sepset detection test shows a 94% sensitivity in 248 patients to predict worsening of the sequential organ failure assessment scores within the first 24 h. A stand-alone centrifugal microfluidic instrument that automates whole-blood Sepset classifier detection is tested, showing a sensitivity of 92%, and specificity of 89% in identifying the risk of 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".