Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 18, 2025

Machine Learning Algorithms for Early Detection of Bone Metastases in an Experimental Rat Model
Published on: August 16, 2020
Predictive Accuracy of Infant Clinical Sign Algorithms for Mortality in Young Infants Aged 0 to 59 Days: A Systematic
Yasir Shafiq1,2,3,4, Alastair Fung5, Sophie Driker1
1Global Advancement of Infants and Mothers (AIM), Department of Pediatric Newborn Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Insights
Clinical sign algorithms can help identify young infants at risk of mortality, especially in hospitals. However, evidence certainty is low due to algorithm variety and limited external validation.
Area of Science:
- Neonatal Health
- Pediatric Mortality Prediction
- Clinical Decision Support
Background:
- Clinical sign algorithms are crucial for identifying young infants susceptible to mortality.
- Accurate identification is essential for timely intervention and improved outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review and synthesize evidence on the accuracy of clinical sign algorithms in predicting all-cause mortality in infants aged 0-59 days.
- To assess the reliability and generalizability of existing algorithms.
Main Methods:
- A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Index Medicus, Cochrane CENTRAL).
- Studies evaluating infant clinical sign algorithms for mortality prediction were included.
- Cochrane methods were used for study screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment, with certainty of evidence determined by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
Main Results:
- Eleven studies involving 26 algorithms were analyzed. Algorithms included sign-based checklists and hospital-based regression models (weighted scores, formulas, nomogram).
- A community-based checklist showed high sensitivity and specificity for sepsis-related deaths in India but poor external validation in Bangladesh for all-cause mortality.
- Hospital-based prediction models demonstrated good performance with Area Under the Curve (AUC) ranging from 0.76-0.93, with one model (Score for Essential Neonatal Symptoms and Signs) achieving an AUC of 0.89 in derivation and 0.83 in external validation.
Conclusions:
- The heterogeneity of algorithms and insufficient external validation limit the current evidence base.
- While clinical sign algorithms show promise for identifying at-risk infants, particularly in hospital settings, the overall certainty of evidence is low.
- Further research with robust external validation is needed to improve the reliability of these tools.
Context:
Clinical sign algorithms are a key strategy to identify young infants at risk of mortality.
Objective:
Synthesize the evidence on the accuracy of clinical sign algorithms to predict all-cause mortality in young infants 0-59 days.
Data Sources:
MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Index Medicus, and Cochrane CENTRAL Registry of Trials.
Study Selection:
Studies evaluating the accuracy of infant clinical sign algorithms to predict mortality.
Data Extraction:
We used Cochrane methods for study screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. We determined certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation.
Results:
We included 11 studies examining 26 algorithms. Three studies from non-hospital/community settings examined sign-based checklists (n = 13). Eight hospital-based studies validated regression models (n = 13), which were administered as weighted scores (n = 8), regression formulas (n = 4), and a nomogram (n = 1). One checklist from India had a sensitivity of 98% (95% CI: 88%-100%) and specificity of 94% (93%-95%) for predicting sepsis-related deaths. However, external validation in Bangladesh showed very low sensitivity of 3% (0%-10%) with specificity of 99% (99%-99%) for all-cause mortality (ages 0-9 days). For hospital-based prediction models, area under the curve (AUC) ranged from 0.76-0.93 (n = 13). The Score for Essential Neonatal Symptoms and Signs had an AUC of 0.89 (0.84-0.93) in the derivation cohort for mortality, and external validation showed an AUC of 0.83 (0.83-0.84).
Limitations:
Heterogeneity of algorithms and lack of external validation limited the evidence.
Conclusions:
Clinical sign algorithms may help identify at-risk young infants, particularly in hospital settings; however, overall certainty of evidence is low with limited external validation.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Actuarial Approach
Consider the example of a high-risk surgical procedure with significant early-stage mortality. A two-year clinical study is conducted,...
Receiver Operating Characteristic Plot
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
Sensitivity is the...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Cancer Survival Analysis

