ArticleAnaesthesia and intensive care2002
The ASA Physical Status Classification: inter-observer consistency. American Society of Anesthesiologists.
Article in Anaesthesia and intensive care, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02713087 (Influence of Vasopressors on Brain Oxygenation and Microcirculation in Anesthetized Patients With Cerebral Tumors), which is not on this map. Cited by 133 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Influence of Vasopressors on Brain Oxygenation and Microcirculation in Anesthetized Patients With Cerebral Tumors
Who cites it
133 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A meta-analysis of the predictive accuracy of postoperative mortality using the American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status classification system.World journal of surgery · 2015Pooled it
- Trial
- An innovative scoring system for predicting an excellent Harris hip score after proximal femoral nail anti-rotation in elderly patients with intertrochanteric fracture.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- Nebulization versus standard application for topical anaesthesia during flexible bronchoscopy under moderate sedation - a randomized controlled trial.Respiratory research · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Classifying American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status With a Low-Rank-Adapted Large Language Model: Development and Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-enabled clinical decision support systems in preadmission testing: a scoping review of risk prediction, triage, and perioperative workflows (2020-2025).Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Article
- Comparison of human-AI agreement in ASA scoring by gender and duration of clinical experience: a real-world study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Mind the gap: a prospective observational study of interprofessional differences in ASA-PS assessments between surgeons and anaesthesiologists.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Observational
- Assessing Racial Bias Within American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification.The Journal of surgical research · 2026Article
- The Effects of Comorbidities on Outcomes After Total Hip Replacement.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Predicting propofol requirements in advanced gastrointestinal endoscopy: a validated model incorporating age and comorbidity index.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Clinical Significance of Incidentally Detected Parotid Masses on Brain MRI and PET-CT.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Intraoperative radiotherapy in brain metastasis surgery allows faster transition to systemic therapy.Neuro-oncology practice · 2025Article
- Article
- Prognostic Nutritional Index as a Predictor of Complications Following Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy.Cureus · 2025Article
- Resection with intraoperative radiotherapy vs. adjuvant radiotherapy in the treatment of eloquent brain metastases: an analysis of feasibility and safety.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Understanding the dynamics of post-surgical recovery and its predictors in resource-limited settings: a prospective cohort study.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Article
73 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification system has previously been shown to be inconsistently applied by anaesthetists. One hundred and sixty questionnaires were sent out to all specialist anaesthetists in Hong Kong. Ten hypothetical patients, identical to those of a similar study undertaken 20 years ago, each with different types and degrees ofphysical disability were described. Respondents were asked about their country of training and type of anaesthetic practice and to assign an ASA classification status for each patient. Ninety-seven questionnaires were returned (61%) after two mailings. Agreement for each patient within groups, between groups and overall comparisons were made. Percentage of agreement was between 31 to 85%. Overall correlation was only fair in all groups (Kappa indices: 0.21-0.4). We found that the current pattern of inter-observer inconsistency of classification was similar to that 20 years ago and exaggerated between locally and overseas trained specialists (P<0.05). The validity of the ASA system, its usefulness and the need for a new, more precise scoring system is discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
12413266What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.