Back

Development and validation of an algorithm to identify severe sepsis onset from electronic medical records

Homayouni, R.; Morrell, S.; Karsten, J.; Chahbra, R.; Bozyk, P. D.

2025-10-07 intensive care and critical care medicine
10.1101/2025.10.02.25336096 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveTo develop and evaluate an automated algorithm to identify sepsis onset from the electronic medical records (EMR), referred to as time-zero (t0), to enable more accurate surveillance, quality improvement, and training related to SEP-1 aligned care. Materials and methodsWe developed an algorithm to construct a comprehensive timeline of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria and organ dysfunction (OD) using structured data, and documentation of infection (DOI) using both structured data and unstructured clinical notes. The algorithm scans each timeline to detect the co-occurrence of SEP-1 components within a 6-hour window to determine t0. Algorithm performance was assessed using 2,030 manually abstracted adult sepsis cases from a large academic health system in southeast Michigan. ResultsUsing a subset of 516 abstracted cases, we show that including clinical notes achieves higher concordance of DOI with abstractors t0 (41.9%) compared to using antibiotic (27.9%) or culture order proxies (34.7%). Combining all three sources achieves the highest DOI concordance (44.4%). On average, the algorithm DOI time was significantly earlier than abstractors (mean: -0.30 h, 95% Cl: -0.51 to -0.09) across all 2,030 cases, resulting in a significantly earlier t0 (mean: -0.51 h, 95% CI: -0.65 to -0.36). DiscussionAutomated approaches to analyze EMR data offer a scalable framework for SEP-1 monitoring, research, and quality improvement. ConclusionIncorporating unstructured clinical notes improves detection of infection suspicion and enhances concordance with manual abstraction of sepsis onset.

Published in JAMIA Open (predicted rank #17) · training set

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.