SynthesisFrontiers in artificial intelligence2024
Applications of artificial intelligence in emergency and critical care diagnostics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application, challenges and prospects of artificial intelligence in acute poisoning management.World journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Revolutionizing non-traumatic acute care: a review of the role of artificial intelligence and machine learning in triaging and diagnosis.Acute and critical care · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Predicting Admission Status, Intensive Care Requirements, and Mortality in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2026Review
- Role of artificial intelligence in virtual emergency care: a protocol for a systematic review.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Feasibility of a multimodal AI-based clinical assessment platform in emergency care: an exploratory pilot study.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Artificial intelligence has come to be the highlight in almost all fields of science. It uses various models and algorithms to detect patterns and specific findings to diagnose a disease with utmost accuracy. With the increasing need for accurate and precise diagnosis of disease, employing artificial intelligence models and concepts in healthcare setup can be beneficial. Methodology: The search engines and databases employed in this study are PubMed, ScienceDirect and Medline. Studies published between 1st January 2013 to 1st February 2023 were included in this analysis. The selected articles were screened preliminarily using the Rayyan web tool, after which investigators screened the selected articles individually. The risk of bias for the selected studies was assessed using QUADAS-2 tool specially designed to test bias among studies related to diagnostic test reviews. Results: In this review, 17 studies were included from a total of 12,173 studies. These studies were analysed for their sensitivity, accuracy, positive predictive value, specificity and negative predictive value in diagnosing barrette's neoplasia, cardiac arrest, esophageal adenocarcinoma, sepsis and gastrointestinal stromal tumors. All the studies reported heterogeneity with Conclusion: The existing evidential data suggests that artificial intelligence can be highly helpful in the field of diagnosis providing maximum precision and early detection. This helps to prevent disease progression and also helps to provide treatment at the earliest. Employing artificial intelligence in diagnosis will define the advancement of health care environment and also be beneficial in every aspect concerned with treatment to illnesses.
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.