ArticleJournal of medical systems2025
Innovative Technologies for Smarter and Efficient Operating Room Scheduling.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated Waitlists for Ambulatory Appointment Scheduling: Multisite, Mixed Methods Evaluation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Development and clinical application of an Intelligent Operating Room Scheduling System.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Could artificial intelligence accelerate progress in ambulatory anesthesia?Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An optimized scheduling system for surgical procedures is considered fundamental for maximizing hospital resource utilization and improving patient outcomes. The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools and New Technologies is paramount in this project to enable personalized patient care and optimize perioperative clinical pathways. We read with interest the manuscript by Parks et al., which developed a predictive model of surgical case durations. The model appears to adopt a pragmatic approach by analyzing tangible variables and undergoing validation across various types of surgical procedures, which suggests potential avenues for enhancing efficiency and sustainability in healthcare practices. However, we have some observations, particularly regarding the feasibility and practical implementation of the proposed model. A key limitation of the model is the precise definition of surgical duration, which requires further specification. To effectively translate the model into a practical scheduling approach, it is essential to consider total Operating Room (OR) occupancy time as a critical determinant of surgical planning and resource allocation. This includes not only the actual procedural time but also preoperative preparation, anesthesia induction and recovery, cleaning, and material restocking, all of which significantly impact overall scheduling efficiency. Another critical aspect concerns the quality and reliability of the input data, which is fundamental for ensuring the accuracy and effectiveness of the model. Furthermore, the adoption of new technologies should be regarded not merely as an innovation but as a means to develop high-performance, efficient tools that enhance current clinical practice. In this context, machine learning models should not only serve as analytical instruments but also as actionable tools, enabling the transition from predictive insights to strategic planning and optimized scheduling, ultimately improving decision-making and resource allocation. While making accurate predictions is a good starting point, maintaining an active AI model requires investment in resources, such as an increase in the number of surgical cases compared to the current organizational system. It may be beneficial to consider the creation of a multidisciplinary group that could promote the integration of AI with other emerging technologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40117042What 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.