Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40537199›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of anaesthesia2025

Emergence from general anaesthesia: stochastic or deterministic?

UnCheol Lee

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of anaesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

UnCheol LeeDepartment of Anesthesiology, Center for Consciousness Science, Neuroscience Graduate Program, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. Electronic address: uclee@med.umich.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Is emergence from general anaesthesia fundamentally stochastic or deterministic? A recent study using genetically identical mice found significant intra-individual and inter-individual variability in emergence times. This variability was better explained by a stochastic neural dynamics model than by traditional deterministic pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models. These findings offer a new perspective on the intrinsic nature of anaesthetic emergence as a stochastic process; however, they also raise important questions about how we define and measure emergence. In particular, since the commonly used righting reflex, a basic motor response, might not adequately reflect recovery of cognitive abilities, and higher-level cognitive functions might follow more predictable, deterministic emergence trajectories, we suggest that future research examine emergence across multiple levels of brain function and adopt more comprehensive, cognition-sensitive markers.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, GeneralAnesthesia Recovery PeriodAnimalsCognitionHumansMiceStochastic Processesanaesthetic emergencecognitive recoveryneural inertiapharmacodynamicspharmacokineticsstochastic model

Identifiers

PMID40537199
PMCPMC12597436

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.