Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 28, 2026

05:28
Evaluation of a Reliable Biomarker in a Cecal Ligation and Puncture-Induced Mouse Model of Sepsis
Published on: December 9, 2022
4.5K
Multicenter Prospective Validation of an Updated Proprietary Sepsis Prediction Model
Andrew Wong1, Danielle Currey2,3, Megan Schwinne4
1University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor.
JAMA Network Open
|February 27, 2026
Summary
The Epic Sepsis Model v2 shows improved early sepsis prediction across 4 health systems. However, it has high variability, low positive predictive value, and a high alert burden, impacting clinical adoption.
Area of Science:
- Clinical Informatics
- Critical Care Medicine
- Health Services Research
Background:
- The Epic Sepsis Model version 2 (ESM v2) is a widely used sepsis prediction tool.
- External validation is crucial to guide its adoption and use in diverse clinical settings.
Purpose of the Study:
- To perform a multicenter validation of the ESM v2.
- To compare ESM v2 performance against the earlier ESM v1.
- To assess ESM v2 performance relative to clinician recognition of sepsis.
Main Methods:
- A prognostic study involving adult inpatient encounters across 4 large US health systems.
- Data collected post-implementation of the new model, analyzed using Sepsis-3 criteria.
- Model discrimination assessed via AUROC; performance compared to clinician recognition using order data.
Main Results:
- Encounter-level AUROC for ESM v2 ranged from 0.82 to 0.92 across sites.
- Prediction-level AUROC (12-hour horizon) ranged from 0.75 to 0.85.
- ESM v2 showed slightly decreased performance compared to clinician recognition, with low positive predictive values (0.13-0.26).
Conclusions:
- Multicenter validation of ESM v2 demonstrated improved early sepsis prediction discrimination.
- Significant institutional variability, low positive predictive value, and high alert burden were observed.
- Findings highlight the need for careful consideration of model performance and alert management in clinical practice.
Related Concept Videos
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
1.5K
In healthcare diagnostics, laboratory tests play a crucial role in identifying and diagnosing a wide range of medical conditions. However, interpreting test results is not always straightforward. An abnormal test result does not always confirm the presence of a disease, just as a normal result does not guarantee its absence. To assess the reliability of these diagnostic tools, healthcare practitioners rely on two key statistical indicators: sensitivity and specificity.
Sensitivity is the...
Sensitivity is the...
1.5K
Pulmonary Embolism II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care
553
Diagnosing Pulmonary EmbolismDiagnosing pulmonary embolism (PE) involves clinical assessment and advanced imaging tests. The preferred diagnostic tool is the spiral (helical) CT scan or CT angiography (CTA), which uses intravenous contrast media to visualize the pulmonary vasculature and identify emboli.A ventilation-perfusion (V/Q) scan is an alternative for patients unable to receive contrast media. This scan includes both perfusion and ventilation scanning. Perfusion scanning involves...
553

