External validation of eight different models to predict sepsis mortality in intensive care units
Authors' conclusion
Time after admission may decide which prediction model is most useful. Early after ICU admission, the sepsis-specific CSM-4 mortality prediction model performed slightly better than other models. However, at 24 h after admission general models not specific for sepsis, like the ANZROD 24, performed well.
Study context
- Population
- Patients admitted to three intensive care units (ICUs) with a final diagnosis of sepsis at ICU discharge
- Participants
- 750 patients · 3 ICUs
- Exposure
- Eight ICU mortality prediction models
- Outcome
- Ability to predict 30-day mortality (AUROC)
- Follow-up
- 30 days
Methodological detailsexternal validation, three ICUs
- External validation
- Three ICUs
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Discrimination for mortality (AUROC)
| Group | AUC |
|---|---|
| CSM-4 | 0.80 |
| ANZROD 24 | 0.83 |
AUC
CSM-40.80
ANZROD 240.83
- CSM-4 at 4 h predicted ICU episode-of-care mortality best
- 0.80
- ANZROD 24 best performing model at 24 h after admission
- 0.83
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Variable availability in routine care
- CSM-4 uses only a few variables frequently retrieved in routine medical care
Original publication
External validation of eight different models to predict sepsis mortality in intensive care units. J Crit Care. Published 9 July 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →