ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025
Machine learning based quantitative pain assessment for the perioperative period.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. 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 of XGBoost in the prediction of acute postoperative pain after major noncardiac surgery in older patients.Molecular painTrial
- Preoperative pulse rate variability and the hemodynamic response to tracheal intubation: a retrospective secondary analysis.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Article
- Wireless IoT-enabled microneedle electroceutical for personalized and connected pain management.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Nociceptive responses to short tetanic stimulation during posttetanic count monitoring in surgical patients: a retrospective cohort study.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2025Article
- Personalized perioperative pain management: a narrative review.Ewha medical journal · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study developed and evaluated a model for assessing pain during the surgical period using photoplethysmogram data from 242 patients. Pain levels were measured at 2 min intervals using a numerical rating scale or clinical criteria: preoperative, before and after intubation, before and after skin incision, and postoperative. Key features from the photoplethysmography waveform were extracted to build XGBoost-based models for intraoperative and postoperative pain assessment. The combined perioperative model was compared with a commercial surgical pain index, yielding area under the receiver operating characteristics curve scores of 0.819 and 0.927 for intraoperative and postoperative periods, respectively, compared to the commercial index's scores of 0.829 and 0.577. These results highlight the models' effectiveness in pain assessment throughout the surgical process, identifying waveform skewness and diastolic phase rate decrease as critical for intraoperative pain assessment and systolic phase area or baseline fluctuation as significant for postoperative pain assessment.Clinical trial registration: Registration name: Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS). Registration site: http://cris.nih.go.kr . Number: KCT0005840. Principal Investigator: Dr. Byung-Moon Choi. Date of registration: January 28, 2021.
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.