Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37386544›Full record

ReviewJournal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care2022

Machine learning in perioperative medicine: a systematic review.

Valentina Bellini, Marina Valente, Giorgia Bertorelli, Barbara Pifferi, Michelangelo Craca, Monica Mordonini, Gianfranco Lombardo, Eleonora Bottani, Paolo Del Rio, Elena Bignami

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The use of artificial intelligence in reconstructive surgery for head and neck cancer: a systematic review.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Advances in Remote Monitoring Technology Applications in Anesthesia: A Narrative Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Development and comparison of machine learning models for predicting postoperative ileus after posterior thoracolumbar fracture surgery.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

10 authors.

Valentina BelliniAnesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine Division, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Viale Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy.
Marina ValenteGeneral Surgery Unit, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Viale Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy.
Giorgia BertorelliAnesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine Division, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Viale Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy.
Barbara PifferiAnesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine Division, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Viale Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy.
Michelangelo CracaAnesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine Division, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Viale Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy.
Monica MordoniniDepartment of Engineering and Architecture, University of Parma, Viale G.P.Usberti 181/A, 43124, Parma, Italy.
Gianfranco LombardoDepartment of Engineering and Architecture, University of Parma, Viale G.P.Usberti 181/A, 43124, Parma, Italy.
Eleonora BottaniDepartment of Engineering and Architecture, University of Parma, Viale G.P.Usberti 181/A, 43124, Parma, Italy.
Paolo Del RioGeneral Surgery Unit, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Viale Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy.
Elena BignamiAnesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine Division, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Viale Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy. elenagiovanna.bignami@unipr.it.

Funding

Fondazione Cariparma FIL-Quota Incentivante of University of Parma co-sponsored by Fondazione CariparmaUniversità degli Studi di Parma Fondo Sociale Europeo, delibera di GR 589/2019-Rif. PA 2019-11449/RER
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRisk stratification plays a central role in anesthetic evaluation. The use of Big Data and machine learning (ML) offers considerable advantages for collection and evaluation of large amounts of complex health-care data. We conducted a systematic review to understand the role of ML in the development of predictive post-surgical outcome models and risk stratification.

methodsFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we selected the period of the research for studies from 1 January 2015 up to 30 March 2021. A systematic search in Scopus, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and MeSH databases was performed; the strings of research included different combinations of keywords: "risk prediction," "surgery," "machine learning," "intensive care unit (ICU)," and "anesthesia" "perioperative." We identified 36 eligible studies. This study evaluates the quality of reporting of prediction models using the Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) checklist.

resultsThe most considered outcomes were mortality risk, systemic complications (pulmonary, cardiovascular, acute kidney injury (AKI), etc.), ICU admission, anesthesiologic risk and prolonged length of hospital stay. Not all the study completely followed the TRIPOD checklist, but the quality was overall acceptable with 75% of studies (Rev #2, comm #minor issue) showing an adherence rate to TRIPOD more than 60%. The most frequently used algorithms were gradient boosting (n = 13), random forest (n = 10), logistic regression (LR; n = 7), artificial neural networks (ANNs; n = 6), and support vector machines (SVM; n = 6). Models with best performance were random forest and gradient boosting, with AUC > 0.90.

conclusionsThe application of ML in medicine appears to have a great potential. From our analysis, depending on the input features considered and on the specific prediction task, ML algorithms seem effective in outcomes prediction more accurately than validated prognostic scores and traditional statistics. Thus, our review encourages the healthcare domain and artificial intelligence (AI) developers to adopt an interdisciplinary and systemic approach to evaluate the overall impact of AI on perioperative risk assessment and on further health care settings as well.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaICUMachine learningPerioperativeRisk predictionSurgery

Identifiers

PMID37386544
PMCPMC8761048

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.