ArticleBioengineering & translational medicine2025
AI-assisted warfarin dose optimisation with CURATE.AI for clinical impact: Retrospective data analysis.
Article in Bioengineering & translational medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Pharmaceutical Care:Saudi medical journal · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in clinical thrombosis and hemostasis: A review.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Review
- AI-assisted warfarin dose optimisation with CURATE.AI for clinical impact: Retrospective data analysis.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in modern clinical practice (Review).Medicine internationalReview
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
Background: Standard-of-care for warfarin dose titration is conventionally based on physician-guided drug dosing. This may lead to frequent deviations from target international normalized ratio (INR) due to inter- and intra-patient variability and may potentially result in adverse events including recurrent thromboembolism and life-threatening hemorrhage. Objectives: We aim to employ CURATE.AI, a small-data, artificial intelligence-derived platform that has been clinically validated in a range of indications, to optimize and guide warfarin dosing. Patients/methods: A personalized CURATE.AI response profile was generated using warfarin dose (inputs) and corresponding change in INR between two consecutive days (phenotypic outputs) and used to identify and recommend an optimal dose to achieve target treatment outcomes. CURATE.AI's predictive performance was then evaluated with a set of metrics that assessed both technical performance and clinical relevance. Results and conclusions: In this retrospective study of 127 patients, CURATE.AI fared better in terms of Percentage Absolute Prediction Error and Percentage Prediction Error of 20% compared to other models in the literature. It also had negligible underprediction bias, potentially translating into lower bleeding risk. Modeled potential time in therapeutic range with CURATE.AI was not significantly different from physician-guided dosing, so it is on-par yet provides a systematic approach to warfarin dosing, easing the mental-burden on guesswork by physicians.This study lays the groundwork for the prospective study of CURATE.AI as a clinical decision support system. CURATE.AI may facilitate the effective use of affordable warfarin with a well-established safety profile, without the need for costly, new oral anticoagulants. This can have significant impact both on the individual and public health.
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.