ArticleKorean journal of anesthesiology2024
Machine learning model of facial expression outperforms models using analgesia nociception index and vital signs to predict postoperative pain intensity: a pilot study.
Article in Korean journal of anesthesiology, 2024. 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.
- The Language Games of Pain in Nursing: A Wittgensteinian Analysis of NANDA-I Diagnoses.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2026Article
- An exploratory study of headache pain intensity using facial expressions and APEX frames.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Comprehensive Approaches to Pain Management in Postoperative Spinal Surgery Patients: Advanced Strategies and Future Directions.Neurology international · 2025Review
- Comparison of diagnostic image modalities for the detection of Achilles tendon tendinopathy using ankle magnetic resonance imaging.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Facial expression analysis and machine learning for objective assessment of alcohol craving in alcohol use disorder: a study protocol.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Predictors and indicators.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 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
backgroundFew studies have evaluated the use of automated artificial intelligence (AI)-based pain recognition in postoperative settings or the correlation with pain intensity. In this study, various machine learning (ML)-based models using facial expressions, the analgesia nociception index (ANI), and vital signs were developed to predict postoperative pain intensity, and their performances for predicting severe postoperative pain were compared.
methodsIn total, 155 facial expressions from patients who underwent gastrectomy were recorded postoperatively; one blinded anesthesiologist simultaneously recorded the ANI score, vital signs, and patient self-assessed pain intensity based on the 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS). The ML models' area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) were calculated and compared using DeLong's test.
resultsML models were constructed using facial expressions, ANI, vital signs, and different combinations of the three datasets. The ML model constructed using facial expressions best predicted an NRS ≥ 7 (AUROC 0.93) followed by the ML model combining facial expressions and vital signs (AUROC 0.84) in the test-set. ML models constructed using combined physiological signals (vital signs, ANI) performed better than models based on individual parameters for predicting NRS ≥ 7, although the AUROCs were inferior to those of the ML model based on facial expressions (all P < 0.050). Among these parameters, absolute and relative ANI had the worst AUROCs (0.69 and 0.68, respectively) for predicting NRS ≥ 7.
conclusionsThe ML model constructed using facial expressions best predicted severe postoperative pain (NRS ≥ 7) and outperformed models constructed from physiological signals.
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.