Evidence Hub

Medical Record Abstraction for Quality Improvement in Sepsis Care Using Artificial Intelligence: A Cluster Randomized Trial

Boussina A, Allison C, Quintero K, Jain S, VanDenBerg C, Hogarth M, Sitapati AM, Singh K et al.

JAMA network open, 2026

301 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Importance: Hospital quality reporting remains a manual, costly process with critical limitations as a mechanism to improve care outcomes.

Objective: To assess whether near-real-time quality measurement, enabled by large language models (LLMs), can improve quality performance as measured by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) quality metric.

Design, setting, and participants: This single-blind, unstratified, cluster randomized trial was conducted between December 13, 2024, and July 8, 2025, at 2 academic emergency departments (EDs) within the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) health system. Participants included all 66 attending physicians who practiced in the UCSD EDs and worked more than 3 shifts per month prior to study initiation.

Intervention: Participants were randomized to receive targeted feedback from LLM-determined compliance with SEP-1 at the time of patient discharge or standard process.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was overall compliance with SEP-1. Secondary outcomes included expert agreement with the LLM SEP-1 determination, 30-day mortality, and intensive care unit admissions of patients with severe sepsis and/or septic shock in the ED. Effect sizes were estimated from a mixed-effects logistic regression model with the intervention group as a fixed effect and a random intercept for physician.

Results: The study population included 66 physicians who treated 301…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 301 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free