Efektivitas Algoritma Predictive Analytics dalam Deteksi Dini Sepsis di ICU terhadap Waktu Intervensi dan Mortalitas
Keywords:
sepsis, predictive analytics, machine learning, sistem peringatan dini, unit perawatan intensif, waktu hingga antibiotik, mortalitas, tinjauan sistematis, meta-analisisAbstract
Pendahuluan: Sepsis merupakan penyebab utama kematian di unit perawatan intensif (ICU), dan setiap jam keterlambatan terapi berhubungan dengan peningkatan mortalitas. Algoritma predictive analytics berbasis rekam medis elektronik—baik rule-based maupun machine learning (ML)—dikembangkan untuk mempercepat deteksi sepsis, tetapi bukti dampaknya terhadap waktu intervensi dan mortalitas masih terfragmentasi. Tinjauan ini bertujuan menilai efektivitas algoritma tersebut terhadap waktu intervensi, mortalitas, dan luaran klinis lain, serta performa diagnostiknya pada populasi ICU.
Metode: Tinjauan sistematis disusun mengikuti PRISMA 2020. Kriteria inklusi hanya mencakup uji klinis acak (RCT), kohort, kasus-kontrol, potong lintang, serta studi observasional prospektif dan retrospektif. Risiko bias dinilai dengan RoB 2, ROBINS-I, PROBAST, dan NOS-xs. Meta-analisis random-effects DerSimonian–Laird dilakukan untuk rasio risiko (RR) mortalitas, RR ketepatan antibiotik/kepatuhan bundle, beda rerata waktu hingga antibiotik, dan AUROC (transformasi logit). Kepastian bukti dinilai dengan GRADE.
Hasil: Dari 124 rekaman unik, 25 studi (26 laporan) diinklusi: 8 RCT/uji pragmatis, 8 kohort/before-after, 1 potong lintang, dan 8 kohort performa model di ICU, dengan 16 domain luaran. Secara keseluruhan, algoritma tidak menurunkan mortalitas secara bermakna (k = 5; RR 0,89; IK 95% 0,73–1,07; I² = 59%). Namun, subkelompok algoritma ML menurunkan mortalitas secara signifikan (k = 3; RR 0,81; IK 95% 0,73–0,90; p < 0,001; I² = 10%), sedangkan algoritma rule-based tidak (RR 1,20; 0,79–1,84). Algoritma meningkatkan ketepatan pemberian antibiotik/kepatuhan bundle sepsis (k = 4; RR 1,12; 1,07–1,17; p < 0,001; I² = 0%). Waktu hingga antibiotik cenderung lebih cepat (beda rerata −1,22 jam; −2,48 hingga 0,03; p = 0,056), dengan arah efek konsisten pada 4/4 studi. AUROC gabungan pada ICU sebesar 0,849 (0,816–0,877), dengan median 0,885 pada validasi internal yang menurun menjadi 0,805 pada validasi eksternal. Studi implementasi melaporkan penurunan lama rawat rumah sakit 9,6–32,3%, readmisi 30 hari 22,7–50,1%, lead time 3–17,6 jam sebelum onset, dan nilai prediktif positif 26–42%. Kepastian bukti umumnya rendah hingga sangat rendah.
Diskusi: Manfaat klinis tidak ditentukan oleh akurasi algoritma semata, tetapi oleh keseluruhan rantai deteksi–respons klinisi–intervensi. Model ML dengan validasi eksternal, kalibrasi lokal, dan alur respons yang terstruktur menunjukkan sinyal manfaat mortalitas yang paling konsisten. Sebaliknya, alert berbasis kriteria SIRS di ICU tidak mengubah luaran. Beban alarm, nilai prediktif positif yang rendah, dan penurunan performa pada validasi eksternal merupakan hambatan utama.
Kesimpulan: Algoritma predictive analytics berbasis ML berhubungan dengan penurunan mortalitas sepsis sekitar 19% dan peningkatan ketepatan intervensi awal, sedangkan alert rule-based tidak memberikan manfaat mortalitas. Implementasi di ICU Indonesia disarankan menggunakan model yang tervalidasi secara lokal, disertai protokol respons dan evaluasi prospektif berjenjang.
References
Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D, Bauer M, et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801-10. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.0287. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/a3e5dbdcba4358048383e4f7c20c9d77/?utm_source
Rudd KE, Johnson SC, Agesa KM, Shackelford KA, Tsoi D, Kievlan DR, et al. Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990–2017: analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet. 2020;395(10219):200-11. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32989-7. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/0c127ae4bda65858b4b9aa980e2f4bb1/?utm_source
Gray A, et al. Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990–2021: a systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2025. doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(25)00356-0. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/e98bea434f7e52a3b158323fb8928e0f/?utm_source
Markwart R, Saito H, Harder T, Tomczyk S, Cassini A, Fleischmann-Struzek C, et al. Epidemiology and burden of sepsis acquired in hospitals and intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2020;46(8):1536-51. doi:10.1007/s00134-020-06106-2. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/25fab809f8eb5febab2c1f58897b75bb/?utm_source
Ghifari MR, Dewi LL, Anjani A. Mortality rates among adults with sepsis and septic shock in Indonesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2026. doi:10.3855/jidc.21943. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/a63cfa59e89d5344af7cd6434d7ad028/?utm_source
Merry M, et al. Profile of sepsis patients treated in intensive care unit of Sanglah Hospital Denpasar. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2021. doi:10.3889/oamjms.2021.7690. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/c877cca69c5456f0bc1dda0a44268938/?utm_source
Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE, Light B, Parrillo JE, Sharma S, et al. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(6):1589-96. doi:10.1097/01.CCM.0000217961.75225.E9. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/26283da37df3508a9d28a7d64714787b/?utm_source
Bagshaw SM, Lapinsky S, Dial S, Arabi Y, Dodek P, Wood G, et al. Acute kidney injury in septic shock: clinical outcomes and impact of duration of hypotension prior to initiation of antimicrobial therapy. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35(5):871-81. doi:10.1007/s00134-008-1367-2. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/0a0fba0c83e85b48ad494a36a884b323/?utm_source
Seymour CW, Gesten F, Prescott HC, Friedrich ME, Iwashyna TJ, Phillips GS, et al. Time to treatment and mortality during mandated emergency care for sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(23):2235-44. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1703058. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/2056794495f85b98a5a8e7fd7fe9666d/?utm_source
Husabø G, Nilsen RM, Flaatten H, Solligård E, Frich JC, Bondevik GT, et al. Early diagnosis of sepsis in emergency departments, time to treatment, and association with mortality: an observational study. PLoS One. 2020;15(1):e0227652. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0227652. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/af6d092dc4b254789bc1455c633e13df/?utm_source
Evans L, Rhodes A, Alhazzani W, Antonelli M, Coopersmith CM, French C, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021. Intensive Care Med. 2021;47(11):1181-247. doi:10.1007/s00134-021-06506-y. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/6df9553f19dd5f908990a78070bd2950/?utm_source
Fleuren LM, Klausch TLT, Zwager CL, Schoonmade LJ, Guo T, Roggeveen LF, et al. Machine learning for the prediction of sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy. Intensive Care Med. 2020;46(3):383-400. doi:10.1007/s00134-019-05872-y. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/222e37db0df65cd8b05bb52638ea2620/?utm_source
Islam KR, et al. Machine learning-based early prediction of sepsis using electronic health records: a systematic review. J Clin Med. 2023;12(17):5658. doi:10.3390/jcm12175658. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/9dcf366563015d9b947e26b0957ba309/?utm_source
Wang Z, et al. A methodological systematic review of validation and performance of sepsis real-time prediction models. NPJ Digit Med. 2025. doi:10.1038/s41746-025-01587-1. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/2a57db1287765afa8f85b0bce101191d/?utm_source
Henry KE, Adams R, Parent C, Soleimani H, Sridharan A, Johnson L, et al. Factors driving provider adoption of the TREWS machine learning-based early warning system and its effects on sepsis treatment timing. Nat Med. 2022;28(7):1447-54. doi:10.1038/s41591-022-01895-z. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/6d612895ceab5a858d0bdf45444741bc/?utm_source
Ginestra JC, Giannini HM, Schweickert WD, Meadows L, Lynch MJ, Pavan K, et al. Clinician perception of a machine learning-based early warning system designed to predict severe sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2019;47(11):1477-84. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003803. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/b30663ca77545285a2566da0db627623/?utm_source
Sendak MP, Ratliff W, Sarro D, Alderton E, Futoma J, Gao M, et al. Real-world integration of a sepsis deep learning technology into routine clinical care: implementation study. JMIR Med Inform. 2020;8(7):e15182. doi:10.2196/15182. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/fe1fe36c93fe50839351c6905ebf4c3b/?utm_source
Edrada EM, Lopez EB, Villarama JB, Salva Villarama EP, et al. First COVID-19 infections in the Philippines: a case report. Trop Med Health. 2020;48:21. doi:10.1186/s41182-020-00203-0. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/4134d3fe99af5b3886756c8047ce3bbd/?utm_source
Warttig S, Alderson P, Evans DJ, Lewis SR, Kourbeti IS, Smith AF. Automated monitoring compared to standard care for the early detection of sepsis in critically ill patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;6(6):CD012404. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD012404.pub2. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/2dfddbb8da6c5fbaa630bd8332196206/?utm_source
Bao W, et al. Effectiveness of automated alerting system compared to usual care for the management of sepsis. NPJ Digit Med. 2022. doi:10.1038/s41746-022-00650-5. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/85d125e1cf15539fb950c3fbfbc97c49/?utm_source
Makam AN, Nguyen OK, Auerbach AD. Diagnostic accuracy and effectiveness of automated electronic sepsis alert systems: a systematic review. J Hosp Med. 2015;10(6):396-402. doi:10.1002/jhm.2347. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/beefb70ad1825182934b0e188d2c9308/?utm_source
Joshi M, Ashrafian H, Arora S, Khan S, Cooke G, Darzi A. Digital alerting and outcomes in patients with sepsis: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(12):e15166. doi:10.2196/15166. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/a8074edec18b5b76b02277b78ef5c0d9/?utm_source
Kim HJ, et al. Sepsis alert systems, mortality, and adherence in emergency departments: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(7):e2422823. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.22823. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/f806798279595fcaa454eb009e1207ab/?utm_source
Adams R, Henry KE, Sridharan A, Soleimani H, Zhan A, Rawat N, et al. Prospective, multi-site study of patient outcomes after implementation of the TREWS machine learning-based early warning system for sepsis. Nat Med. 2022;28(7):1455-60. doi:10.1038/s41591-022-01894-0. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/abee295d872555919416a3ed8d23e5ba/?utm_source
Boussina A, Shashikumar SP, Malhotra A, Owens RL, El-Kareh R, Longhurst CA, et al. Impact of a deep learning sepsis prediction model on quality of care and survival. NPJ Digit Med. 2024;7(1):14. doi:10.1038/s41746-023-00986-6. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/ecc5a3a4bd2e5e488bf7887aae9e4899/?utm_source
Persson I, et al. Early prediction of sepsis in intensive care patients using the machine learning algorithm NAVOY® Sepsis, a prospective randomized clinical validation study. J Crit Care. 2024;80:154400. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/4733b7c429f551c78b146d66cabf31f8/?utm_source
Kijpaisalratana N, et al. Real-time machine learning-assisted sepsis alert enhances the timeliness of antibiotic administration and diagnostic accuracy in emergency department patients with sepsis: a cluster-randomized trial. Intern Emerg Med. 2024. doi:10.1007/s11739-024-03535-5. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/3c2efcdae28859949844a2c5c58f63f7/?utm_source
Zhang R, et al. Machine learning predicts sepsis deterioration trajectories. NPJ Digit Med. 2026. doi:10.1038/s41746-026-02565-x. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/15222238068a5af1aa0ab3f060b71f01/?utm_source
Moor M, et al. Predicting sepsis using deep learning across international sites: a retrospective development and validation study. EClinicalMedicine. 2023;62:102124. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102124. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/bb649b32c6295503a439ae7e9bef417e/?utm_source
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):89. doi:10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/c1a1d4c752e857f2ba6639ed813f181a/?utm_source
Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21(11):1539-58. doi:10.1002/sim.1186. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/c88a2b1a984b50028385c0732e8e8be0/?utm_source
Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366:l4898. doi:10.1136/bmj.l4898. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/99eca47c80a253ec80ec043138089451/?utm_source
Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919. doi:10.1136/bmj.i4919. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/87e695ba99c35aea9a306d7410d8d111/?utm_source
Moons KGM, Wolff RF, Riley RD, Whiting PF, Westwood M, Collins GS, et al. PROBAST: a tool to assess risk of bias and applicability of prediction model studies: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170(1):W1-W33. doi:10.7326/M18-1377. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/bd14473cef8b554497cbed42a08d7a94/?utm_source
Moons KGM, et al. PROBAST+AI: an updated quality, risk of bias, and applicability assessment tool for prediction models using regression or artificial intelligence methods. BMJ. 2025. doi:10.1136/bmj-2024-082505. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/a5c81c0c866c5d92bd13b33ac4b45e5a/?utm_source
Carra MC, et al. Risk of bias evaluation of cross-sectional studies: adaptation of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. J Periodontal Res. 2025. doi:10.1111/jre.13405. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/e6892286f22c5516bd1f388995669658/?utm_source
Hooper MH, Weavind L, Wheeler AP, Martin JB, Gowda SS, Semler MW, et al. Randomized trial of automated, electronic monitoring to facilitate early detection of sepsis in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(7):2096-101. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e318250a887. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/90c30fd65cec5eaaa754fe4d34cd9e8b/?utm_source
Semler MW, Weavind L, Hooper MH, Rice TW, Gowda SS, Nadas A, et al. An electronic tool for the evaluation and treatment of sepsis in the ICU: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care Med. 2015;43(8):1595-602. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000001020. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/47c38e19eabc56b589b9079267af926a/?utm_source
Shimabukuro DW, Barton CW, Feldman MD, Mataraso SJ, Das R. Effect of a machine learning-based severe sepsis prediction algorithm on patient survival and hospital length of stay: a randomised clinical trial. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2017;4(1):e000234. doi:10.1136/bmjresp-2017-000234. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/a1d8abd75d6f577484338708a69aa5d4/?utm_source
Downing NL, Rolnick J, Poole SF, Hall E, Wessels AJ, Heidenreich P, et al. Electronic health record-based clinical decision support alert for severe sepsis: a randomised evaluation. BMJ Qual Saf. 2019;28(9):762-8. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008765. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/477f2501763850029104d168dd1d42ca/?utm_source
Tarabichi Y, et al. Improving timeliness of antibiotic administration using a provider and pharmacist facing sepsis early warning system in the emergency department setting: a randomized controlled quality improvement initiative. Crit Care Med. 2022;50(3):418-27. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000005267. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/bf41330b0f6d597283e1dff927d6d37a/?utm_source
Leisman DE, et al. Effect of automated real-time feedback on early-sepsis care: a pragmatic clinical trial. Crit Care Med. 2023. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000006057. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/0bc6462a42bd598eb34ea519b870bfaf/?utm_source
Umscheid CA, Betesh J, VanZandbergen C, Hanish A, Tait G, Mikkelsen ME, et al. Development, implementation, and impact of an automated early warning and response system for sepsis. J Hosp Med. 2015;10(1):26-31. doi:10.1002/jhm.2259. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/12782fe550885714af447c10a8f39f37/?utm_source
McCoy A, Das R. Reducing patient mortality, length of stay and readmissions through machine learning-based sepsis prediction in the emergency department, intensive care unit and hospital floor units. BMJ Open Qual. 2017;6(2):e000158. doi:10.1136/bmjoq-2017-000158. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/98e49aa123595a2287f111407c434d67/?utm_source
Giannini HM, Ginestra JC, Chivers C, Draugelis M, Hanish A, Schweickert WD, et al. A machine learning algorithm to predict severe sepsis and septic shock: development, implementation, and impact on clinical practice. Crit Care Med. 2019;47(11):1485-92. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003891. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/021a29986d625ebca215235d9368b748/?utm_source
Burdick H, Pino E, Gabel-Comeau D, McCoy A, Gu C, Roberts J, et al. Effect of a sepsis prediction algorithm on patient mortality, length of stay and readmission: a prospective multicentre clinical outcomes evaluation of real-world patient data from US hospitals. BMJ Health Care Inform. 2020;27(1):e100109. doi:10.1136/bmjhci-2019-100109. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/3f2f7a79a5e45250ad8756bd0cb2e623/?utm_source
Lipatov K, et al. Implementation and evaluation of sepsis surveillance and decision support in medical ICU and emergency department. Am J Emerg Med. 2021. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2021.09.086. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/3e50e2652c09531a8704905307ddbd7a/?utm_source
Desautels T, Calvert J, Hoffman J, Jay M, Kerem Y, Shieh L, et al. Prediction of sepsis in the intensive care unit with minimal electronic health record data: a machine learning approach. JMIR Med Inform. 2016;4(3):e28. doi:10.2196/medinform.5909. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/ddaa9e5a9f4a5d7483969df28c113cdf/?utm_source
Nemati S, Holder A, Razmi F, Stanley MD, Clifford GD, Buchman TG. An interpretable machine learning model for accurate prediction of sepsis in the ICU. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(4):547-53. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002936. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/149da1e6158c57b3a2bb9551c40469ee/?utm_source
Scherpf M, Gräßer F, Malberg H, Zaunseder S. Predicting sepsis with a recurrent neural network using the MIMIC III database. Comput Biol Med. 2019;113:103395. doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2019.103395. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/5f0ac9ea53015f16b080e3f6392cc849/?utm_source
Persson I, Östling A, Arlbrandt M, Söderberg J, Becedas D. A machine learning sepsis prediction algorithm for intended intensive care unit use (NAVOY Sepsis): proof-of-concept study. JMIR Form Res. 2021;5(9):e28000. doi:10.2196/28000. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/26e390845254562599982ee059a8dcf3/?utm_source
Shashikumar SP, Wardi G, Malhotra A, Nemati S. Artificial intelligence sepsis prediction algorithm learns to say "I don't know". NPJ Digit Med. 2021;4(1):134. doi:10.1038/s41746-021-00504-6. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/4560689e85765b94840a3086c881b061/?utm_source
Wang D, et al. A machine learning model for accurate prediction of sepsis in ICU patients. Front Public Health. 2021;9:754348. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.754348. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/53179252f0665f68b19dc9dc4a6ad06d/?utm_source
Chen Q, et al. Transferability and interpretability of the sepsis prediction models in the intensive care unit. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2022. doi:10.1186/s12911-022-02090-3. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/c11bd0b2738c580482b24e393373b093/?utm_source
DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials revisited. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015;45(Pt A):139-45. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2015.09.002. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/d9d9bc2706555ba08482c38fa8748e1f/?utm_source
Borenstein M, Higgins JPT, Hedges LV, Rothstein HR. Basics of meta-analysis: I² is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity. Res Synth Methods. 2017;8(1):5-18. doi:10.1002/jrsm.1230. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/0dc1ce9529295b6c83ecf276695f99ae/?utm_source
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336(7650):924-6. doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/8f5d9e0559a45bd6b1e5b7202ca9c44b/?utm_source
Wong A, Otles E, Donnelly JP, Krumm A, McCullough J, DeTroyer-Cooley O, et al. External validation of a widely implemented proprietary sepsis prediction model in hospitalized patients. JAMA Intern Med. 2021;181(8):1065-70. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.2626. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/76c30a01075c576a8e8dddc245ff66be/?utm_source
Gross B, et al. Mortality and antibiotic timing in deep learning-derived surviving sepsis campaign risk groups: a multicenter study. Crit Care. 2025. doi:10.1186/s13054-025-05493-6. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/3839ada0af2858ca8c7d524304d8b547/?utm_source
Patel H, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of externally validated Epic clinical decision support tools. J Gen Intern Med. 2026. doi:10.1007/s11606-026-10381-y. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/a87417f01bff53ed9c9011fccd861bd8/?utm_source
Wong A, et al. Multicenter prospective validation of an updated proprietary sepsis prediction model. JAMA Netw Open. 2026. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.0181. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/5c1a6db4056952b1b9a581537e714a80/?utm_source
Dutta S, et al. Performance of a sepsis prediction model across different sepsis definitions. JAMA Netw Open. 2026. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.5599. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/746252201e985da9bb6b14a7f8b4787e/?utm_source
Currey D, et al. External validation of a widely available, localizable sepsis early detection model in the emergency department setting. Am J Emerg Med. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2025.07.056. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/7e68a375909953f2be7d74e1cea04a13/?utm_source
Valan B, et al. Evaluating Sepsis Watch generalizability through multisite external validation of a sepsis machine learning model. NPJ Digit Med. 2025. doi:10.1038/s41746-025-01664-5. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/4bdbd65c4b0c58eb87afbb9acfd8bc55/?utm_source
Moja L, Kwag KH, Lytras T, Bertizzolo L, Brandt L, Pecoraro V, et al. Effectiveness of computerized decision support systems linked to electronic health records: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(12):e12-22. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2014.302164. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/f634d54582ae52ab9d4bdab1469ebf78/?utm_source
Ackermann K, Baker J, Green M, Fullick M, Varinli H, Westbrook J, et al. Computerized clinical decision support systems for the early detection of sepsis among adult inpatients: scoping review. J Med Internet Res. 2022;24(2):e31083. doi:10.2196/31083. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/1e07fd8d50345d89bfffc5ab50f756c4/?utm_source
Zhang Y, et al. Machine learning for the prediction of sepsis-related death: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2023. doi:10.1186/s12911-023-02383-1. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/cf4f011bf3f355a98bfa776f8532272d/?utm_source
Mușat F, et al. Machine learning models in sepsis outcome prediction for ICU patients: integrating routine laboratory tests—a systematic review. Biomedicines. 2024;12(12):2892. doi:10.3390/biomedicines12122892. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/28b2a644184359fc97fdf89c37178a06/?utm_source
Rossetti SC, et al. Real-time surveillance system for patient deterioration: a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial. Nat Med. 2025. doi:10.1038/s41591-025-03609-7. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/5da972bb22c55059aa1a22c0d1085780/?utm_source
Escobar GJ, Liu VX, Schuler A, Lawson B, Greene JD, Kipnis P. Automated identification of adults at risk for in-hospital clinical deterioration. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(20):1951-60. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa2001090. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/ac5bb84b2dc65725b07a3a2faafb6bee/?utm_source
Levin MA, et al. Real-time machine learning alerts to prevent escalation of care: a nonrandomized clustered pragmatic clinical trial. Crit Care Med. 2024. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000006243. Tersedia di: https://consensus.app/papers/details/a744a5e7c21f517295068daa6751c676/?utm_source
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Eriza Septia Pratiwi, Al Ma Ariz Ridhuwan (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
