Abstract
Background Delay in diagnosing sepsis results in potentially preventable deaths. Mainly due to their complexity or limited applicability, machine learning (ML) models to predict sepsis have not yet become part of clinical routines. For this reason, we created a ML model that only requires complete blood count (CBC) diagnostics.
Methods Non-intensive care unit (non-ICU) data from a German tertiary care centre were collected from January 2014 to December 2021. Patient age, sex, and CBC parameters (haemoglobin, platelets, mean corpuscular volume, white and red blood cells) were utilised to train a boosted random forest, which predicts sepsis with ICU admission. Two external validations were conducted using data from another German tertiary care centre and the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database (MIMIC-IV). Using the subset of laboratory orders also including procalcitonin (PCT), an analogous model was trained with PCT as an additional feature.
Findings After exclusion, 1,381,358 laboratory requests (2016 from sepsis cases) were available. The derived CBC model shows an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) of 0.872 (95% CI, 0.857–0.887) for predicting sepsis. External validations show AUROCs of 0.805 (95% CI, 0.787–0.824) and 0.845 (95% CI, 0.837–0.852) for MIMIC-IV. The model including PCT revealed a significantly higher performance (AUROC: 0.857; 95% CI, 0.836–0.877) than PCT alone (AUROC: 0.790; 95% CI, 0.759–0.821; p<0.001).
Interpretation Our results demonstrate that routine CBC results could significantly improve diagnosis of sepsis when combined with ML. The CBC model can facilitate early sepsis prediction in non-ICU patients with high robustness in external validations. Its implementation in clinical decision support systems has strong potential to provide an essential time advantage and increase patient safety.
Funding The study was part of the AMPEL project (www.ampel.care), which is co-financed through public funds according to the budget decided by the Saxon State Parliament under the RL eHealthSax 2017/18 grant number 100331796.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The study was supported by the AMPEL project (www.ampel.care). This project is co-financed through public funds according to the budget decided by the Saxon State Parliament under the RL eHealthSax 2017/18 grant number 100331796. The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors PA, MS, LH, and SG. The author DS was funded by the POLAR_MI project of the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research under grant number 01ZZ1910[A-Z]. Both funders did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at http://www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
1. The Ethics Committee at the Leipzig University Faculty of Medicine approved the study (reference number: 214/18-ek). 2. The Ethics Committee at the University Medicine Greifswald approved the study (reference number: BB133/10).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data and code are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Public License.
