ReviewCureus2025
The Role of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Applications in Emergency Surgery: A Systematic Review of Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Outcomes.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advances in Imaging and Diagnosis of Emphysematous Cholecystitis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to computer systems' ability to perform tasks requiring human intelligence. In recent years, AI has rapidly evolved in various fields, including the medical field. The integration of AI into emergency surgical care represents a significant advancement in modern medicine. This field has developed rapidly, particularly since the mid-2010s. The advancement in AI-assisted emergency surgery is built upon several technological pillars, such as deep learning, natural language processing for rapid medical record analysis, and integration with existing hospital information systems. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of machine learning in identifying emergency patients and the effectiveness of AI methods in diagnosing them compared to conventional methods. We also aim to assess AI's capability in predicting complications and the need for surgical intervention. The systematic review included English-language research papers published between 2015 and 2025 focusing on human studies. Two independent reviewers analyzed articles following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, screening titles from five significant databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, and Embase). The final selection process ensured all included studies aligned with the primary research question examining machine learning's impact on emergency care accuracy and efficiency. This systematic review identified 19 eligible studies from an initial pool of 2791 publications. The results showed the significance of the application of AI across five key areas of emergency surgery: appendicitis management (five studies), emergency abdominal surgery risk assessment (five studies), acute abdominal pain and triage (two studies), bowel obstruction (four studies), and acute conditions of the gallbladder and mesenteric vessels (three studies). Machine learning models demonstrated promising accuracy rates compared to conventional methods in all the different aspects. This systematic review highlights the promising impact of AI and machine learning across emergency surgery domains. The models demonstrated remarkable accuracy (72-98%) across various applications, from appendicitis diagnosis to cholecystitis detection. Most notably, AI tools showed superior performance in acute abdominal pain triage and risk assessment compared to conventional methods, suggesting their potential to enhance clinical decision-making in emergency surgical settings.
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.