Evaluating deep learning sepsis prediction models in ICUs under distribution shift: a multi-centre retrospective cohort study

Sepsis prediction models trained on ICU data often fail to generalize under external validation because of distribution shift. Prior studies have focused on direct model deployment or conventional transfer learning methods (e.g., fine-tuning), yet systematic exploration of alternative strategies remains limited. We quantify shifts across three harmonized adult ICU cohorts (HiRID, MIMIC-IV, eICU; 216,536 stays) and compare five deployment strategies: generalization, fine-tuning/retraining, target training, supervised domain adaptation (DA), and fusion-training, across multiple deep learning architectures, and four target-data regimes (none; small ≤ 8k; medium 8-32k; large ≥ 32k stays). Fine-tuning consistently underperforms, even though it has been the go-to method in literature. Retraining and fusion perform best in small and large target data regimes, while DA yields the most stable gains with medium target data, improving AUROC and normalized AUPRC over other methods. These results argue for moving beyond routine fine-tuning for sepsis prediction and selecting strategies by target-data availability and operational context.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
npj Digital Medicine
Published
2026-03-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-026-02364-4
Primary Topic
Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating deep learning sepsis prediction models in ICUs under distribution shift: a multi-centre retrospective cohort study

Youssef Farag, Lakmal Meegahapola, Catherine R. Jutzeler, Fanny Tranchellini
npj Digital Medicine
Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Evaluating deep learning sepsis prediction models in ICUs under distribution shift: a multi-centre retrospective cohort study

Youssef Farag, Lakmal Meegahapola, Catherine R. Jutzeler, Fanny Tranchellini
article en

Abstract

Sepsis prediction models trained on ICU data often fail to generalize under external validation because of distribution shift. Prior studies have focused on direct model deployment or conventional transfer learning methods (e.g., fine-tuning), yet systematic exploration of alternative strategies remains limited. We quantify shifts across three harmonized adult ICU cohorts (HiRID, MIMIC-IV, eICU; 216,536 stays) and compare five deployment strategies: generalization, fine-tuning/retraining, target training, supervised domain adaptation (DA), and fusion-training, across multiple deep learning architectures, and four target-data regimes (none; small ≤ 8k; medium 8-32k; large ≥ 32k stays). Fine-tuning consistently underperforms, even though it has been the go-to method in literature. Retraining and fusion perform best in small and large target data regimes, while DA yields the most stable gains with medium target data, improving AUROC and normalized AUPRC over other methods. These results argue for moving beyond routine fine-tuning for sepsis prediction and selecting strategies by target-data availability and operational context.

npj Digital Medicine
SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics (CH), ETH Zurich (CH)
Novartis Foundation, Novartis Stiftung für Medizinisch-Biologische Forschung
Openalex Percentile: Top 36%
Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Evaluating deep learning sepsis prediction models in ICUs under distribution shift: a multi-centre retrospective cohort study — Youssef Farag, Lakmal Meegahapola, et al. · npj Digital Medicine (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS