ArticleBJS open2023
Machine learning models to predict surgical case duration compared to current industry standards: scoping review.
Article in BJS open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Machine Learning Algorithms for Predicting Spine Surgery Duration.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Article
- Machine learning-enhanced prediction of operating room occupation time and length of stay: a retrospective cohort study on emergency surgery care pathways.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2025Article
- Accuracy and Reliability of Artificial Intelligence in Surgical Decision-Making: A Literature Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Machine learning-based analysis of factors influencing surgical duration in type A aortic dissection.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- PitRSDNet: Predicting intra-operative remaining surgery duration in endoscopic pituitary surgery.Healthcare technology letters · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical waiting lists have risen dramatically across the UK as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The effective use of operating theatres by optimal scheduling could help mitigate this, but this requires accurate case duration predictions. Current standards for predicting the duration of surgery are inaccurate. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers the potential for greater accuracy in predicting surgical case duration. This study aimed to investigate whether there is evidence to support that AI is more accurate than current industry standards at predicting surgical case duration, with a secondary aim of analysing whether the implementation of the models used produced efficiency savings.
methodPubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE libraries were searched through to July 2023 to identify appropriate articles. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews and the Arksey and O'Malley framework were followed. Study quality was assessed using a modified version of the reporting guidelines for surgical AI papers by Farrow et al. Algorithm performance was reported using evaluation metrics.
resultsThe search identified 2593 articles: 14 were suitable for inclusion and 13 reported on the accuracy of AI algorithms against industry standards, with seven demonstrating a statistically significant improvement in prediction accuracy (P < 0.05). The larger studies demonstrated the superiority of neural networks over other machine learning techniques. Efficiency savings were identified in a RCT. Significant methodological limitations were identified across most studies.
conclusionThe studies suggest that machine learning and deep learning models are more accurate at predicting the duration of surgery; however, further research is required to determine the best way to implement this technology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.