| AI in Clinical Medicine, ISSN 2819-7437 online, Open Access |
| Article copyright, the authors; Journal compilation copyright, AI Clin Med and Elmer Press Inc |
| Journal website https://aicm.elmerpub.com |
Review
Volume 2, April 2026, e21
Integrating Artificial Intelligence Into Sepsis Care: A Narrative Review of Predictive Models and Implementation Pathways
Figures


Tables
| Model | Year | Institution | Data inputs | AUROC (best reported) | Validation type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI: artificial intelligence; AUROC: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; EHR: electronic health record; ICU: intensive care unit; ML: machine learning. | |||||
| Epic Sepsis Model (ESM) | 2018 | Epic Systems (USA) | Proprietary EHR variables | 0.63 | External |
| InSight | 2016 | UCSF & University of Chicago | 6 vital signs | > 0.90 | Internal + external |
| Sepsis Watch | 2019 | Duke University + HBI Solutions | Real-time EHR data | 0.85–0.90 | Prospective (ED) |
| DeepAISE | 2021 | UCSD & Emory Univ. | 65 clinical variables | 0.90 (internal), 0.87 (external) | Internal + external |
| TREWS | 2022 | Johns Hopkins University | Hybrid rules + ML | Not reported (improved outcomes) | Prospective (multi-site) |
| MGP-TCN/GRU-D-MGP-TCN | 2019–2024 | ETH Zurich + Collaborators | ICU time-series data | Up to 0.99 | Internal |
| Tool/model | Typical AUROC | Key strengths | Main limitations |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI: artificial intelligence; APACHE II: Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II; AUROC: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; EHR: electronic health record; ICU: intensive care unit; qSOFA: quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment; SIRS: systemic inflammatory response syndrome. | |||
| SIRS | 0.50–0.65 | Simple, highly sensitive | Poor specificity, many false positives |
| qSOFA/SOFA | 0.60–0.90 (varies by cohort) | Better prognostic accuracy than SIRS | Requires labs, performance varies by setting |
| APACHE II | 0.80–0.83 | Widely used for ICU mortality prediction | Complex, not designed for early sepsis detection |
| Epic Sepsis Model (ESM) | 0.63 (external validation) | Widely deployed; EHR integrated | Poor external performance, non-transparent |
| InSight | 0.88–0.92 | Minimal data (six vitals), robust across sites | Limited prospective validation |
| DeepAISE | 0.87–0.90 | High accuracy, interpretable factors | High data requirements |
| MGP-TCN/GRU-D hybrid | 0.90–0.99 | Handles time-series ICU data; very high accuracy | Computationally intensive, early-stage |
| Random forest | 0.85–0.95 | Robust, interpretable variable importance | Performance varies by dataset |