Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40938328›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2026

Towards reliable prediction of intraoperative hypotension: a cross-center evaluation of deep learning-based and MAP-derived methods.

Nada Chaari, Greg Winski, Magnus Hallbäck, Niclas Lundström, Håkan Björne, Martin Jacobsson

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

6 authors.

Nada ChaariDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Hälsovägen 11, Huddinge, 141 52, Sweden. nadcha@kth.se.
Greg WinskiDepartment of Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, 141 86, Sweden.
Magnus HallbäckMaquet Critical Care AB, Röntgenvägen 2, Solna, 171 06, Sweden.
Niclas LundströmDepartment of Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, 141 86, Sweden.
Håkan BjörneDepartment of Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, 141 86, Sweden.
Martin JacobssonDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Hälsovägen 11, Huddinge, 141 52, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intraoperative hypotension (IOH) is associated with an increased risk of heart and kidney complications. Although AI tools aim to predict IOH, their real-world reliability is often overstated due to biased data selection. This study introduces a framework to enhance reliability by: (1) including borderline blood pressure cases (65-75 mmHg, the "Gray Zone"), (2) comparing AI model to simple blood pressure threshold, and (3) validating across diverse surgical cohorts, centers and demographics. Using datasets from Karolinska University Hospital (Sweden) and VitalDB (Korea), we found AI model performs better than MAP threshold method in more ambiguous cases. In contrast, when hypotensive and non-hypotensive cases had clearly separated MAP values, both methods performed similarly well. Cross-validation revealed asymmetric generalizability: models trained on datasets containing more borderline (Gray Zone) cases generalized better to datasets with clearer class separation, whereas the reverse struggled. To ensure fair model comparison and reduce dataset-specific bias, we standardized the MAP difference between positive (hypotension) and negative (non-hypotension) samples at the time of prediction. This virtually eliminated the class separation and demonstrated that inflated performance in some datasets can be attributed to selection bias rather than true model generalizability. Age also influenced generalization: Cross-age validation revealed models trained on older patients generalized better to younger cohorts, whereas differences in ASA classification had minimal effect. These findings highlight the need for realistic validation to bridge the gap between AI research and clinical practice.

Indexed as

Deep LearningHypotensionIntraoperative ComplicationsMonitoring, IntraoperativeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsBlood PressureBlood Pressure DeterminationDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsArterial blood pressureDeep convolutional neural networkHypotension eventsIntraoperative hypotensionMAP-derived methodsModel generalizability

Identifiers

PMID40938328
PMCPMC12963106

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.