Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jun 20;30(7):1349-1361.
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocad075.

Deployment of machine learning algorithms to predict sepsis: systematic review and application of the SALIENT clinical AI implementation framework

Affiliations

Deployment of machine learning algorithms to predict sepsis: systematic review and application of the SALIENT clinical AI implementation framework

Anton H van der Vegt et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. .

Abstract

Objective: To retrieve and appraise studies of deployed artificial intelligence (AI)-based sepsis prediction algorithms using systematic methods, identify implementation barriers, enablers, and key decisions and then map these to a novel end-to-end clinical AI implementation framework.

Materials and methods: Systematically review studies of clinically applied AI-based sepsis prediction algorithms in regard to methodological quality, deployment and evaluation methods, and outcomes. Identify contextual factors that influence implementation and map these factors to the SALIENT implementation framework.

Results: The review identified 30 articles of algorithms applied in adult hospital settings, with 5 studies reporting significantly decreased mortality post-implementation. Eight groups of algorithms were identified, each sharing a common algorithm. We identified 14 barriers, 26 enablers, and 22 decision points which were able to be mapped to the 5 stages of the SALIENT implementation framework.

Discussion: Empirical studies of deployed sepsis prediction algorithms demonstrate their potential for improving care and reducing mortality but reveal persisting gaps in existing implementation guidance. In the examined publications, key decision points reflecting real-word implementation experience could be mapped to the SALIENT framework and, as these decision points appear to be AI-task agnostic, this framework may also be applicable to non-sepsis algorithms. The mapping clarified where and when barriers, enablers, and key decisions arise within the end-to-end AI implementation process.

Conclusions: A systematic review of real-world implementation studies of sepsis prediction algorithms was used to validate an end-to-end staged implementation framework that has the ability to account for key factors that warrant attention in ensuring successful deployment, and which extends on previous AI implementation frameworks.

Keywords: AI implementation; artificial intelligence; machine learning; sepsis prediction; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests with respect to this publication.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flowchart for study selection.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Evaluation results for algorithm performance, adoption, clinical process, and mortality improvement for each MLA group. Figure includes risk of bias (RoB) assessment for studies reporting mortality assessment (M = moderate [some concerns for RoB-2], S = serious, C = critical). Black numbered squares denote the cited paper for that result. AUC: area under the receiver operating curve; Sens: sensitivity; Spec: specificity; PPV/NPV: positive/negative predictive value. Solid shaded up arrow: significant improvement, whereas hollow up arrow: non-significant improvement.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
The number of barriers (red badge), enablers (green badge), and decision points (blue badge), denoted by the number within the badge, mapped to each stage and component of the SALIENT AI implementation framework. Implementation stages are labeled in the title row from left to right. The color-coded solution components are developed in row B, and consist of Clinical workflow (blue), AI model (yellow), data pipeline (green), and human-computer interface (red). The components are integrated in rows C and D, and rows F and G describe cross-stage elements required throughout the entire implementation process, such as governance and quality and safety assurance. w/flow: workflow; dev/test: development & test; HCI: human computer interface.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Rudd KE, Johnson SC, Agesa KM, 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. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fernando SM, Rochwerg B, Seely AJE.. Clinical implications of the third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). CMAJ 2018; 190 (36): E1058–9. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB, et al.Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. Chest 1992; 101 (6): 1644–55. - PubMed
    1. Dugani S, Veillard J, Kissoon N.. Reducing the global burden of sepsis. CMAJ 2017; 189 (1): E2–3. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Seymour CW, Gesten F, Prescott HC, et al.Time to treatment and mortality during mandated emergency care for sepsis. N Engl J Med 2017; 376 (23): 2235–44. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types