Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32706670›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2020

Reinforcement Learning for Clinical Decision Support in Critical Care: Comprehensive Review.

Siqi Liu, Kay Choong See, Kee Yuan Ngiam, Leo Anthony Celi, Xingzhi Sun, Mengling Feng

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

77 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Artificial intelligence in pediatric pain: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Smart Imitator: Learning from Imperfect Clinical Decisions.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Siqi LiuNUS Graduate School for Integrative Science and Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-0605-2958
Kay Choong SeeDivision of Respiratory & Critical Care Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-2528-7282
Kee Yuan NgiamGroup Chief Technology Office, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-5676-2520
Leo Anthony CeliInstitute for Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6712-6626
Xingzhi SunPing An Health Technology, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6519-0197
Mengling FengSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-5338-6248

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDecision support systems based on reinforcement learning (RL) have been implemented to facilitate the delivery of personalized care. This paper aimed to provide a comprehensive review of RL applications in the critical care setting.

objectiveThis review aimed to survey the literature on RL applications for clinical decision support in critical care and to provide insight into the challenges of applying various RL models.

methodsWe performed an extensive search of the following databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), and Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE). Studies published over the past 10 years (2010-2019) that have applied RL for critical care were included.

resultsWe included 21 papers and found that RL has been used to optimize the choice of medications, drug dosing, and timing of interventions and to target personalized laboratory values. We further compared and contrasted the design of the RL models and the evaluation metrics for each application.

conclusionsRL has great potential for enhancing decision making in critical care. Challenges regarding RL system design, evaluation metrics, and model choice exist. More importantly, further work is required to validate RL in authentic clinical environments.

Indexed as

Reinforcement, PsychologyCritical CareDecision Support Systems, ClinicalHumansartificial intelligencecritical caredecision support systems, clinicalintensive care unitmachine learningreinforcement learning

Identifiers

PMID32706670
PMCPMC7400046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.