ArticleAnaesthesia2026
Development, external validation and integration into clinical workflow of machine learning models to support pre-operative assessment in the UK.
Article in Anaesthesia, 2026. 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.
- Decision thresholds for machine learning pre-operative risk assessment.Anaesthesia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDemand for surgical treatment is growing and patient complexity is increasing. The NHS England standard contract now requires that pre-operative services risk stratify and optimise patients awaiting surgery. However, current pre-operative workflows (whether electronic or paper-based) remain based primarily on resource-intensive manual tasks. Lack of real-time data transfer has been identified as a key limitation to reducing the surgical backlog.
methodsWe developed certified electronic linkages between a live pre-operative assessment system (Smart PreOp, Aire Logic Ltd, Leeds, UK) and the GP Connect system from NHS England to retrieve clinical data directly from general practitioner records into pre-operative questionnaires. We developed machine learning models to categorise patients into lower- and higher-risk cohorts based on their predicted ASA physical status (1 or 2 vs. 3-5) and 30-day postoperative mortality risk. In contrast with previous prediction modelling studies, we constrained variable selection from the outset to variables that are available electronically in real time for all UK surgical patients regardless of where they present (the proposed procedure, demographics and medications lists).
resultsThe development and external validation cohorts consisted of 110,732 and 67,878 patients, respectively, from two NHS Trusts using different electronic record systems. In external validation, at decision threshold 0.2, the ASA physical status prediction model had recall 0.69 and precision 0.95 for identifying lower-risk (ASA physical status 1 or 2) patients. The mortality prediction model discriminated well in external validation but was poorly calibrated, lending support to the existing literature showing that hospital-specific modelling improves mortality risk prediction. The technical architecture of the Smart PreOp system facilitates such hospital-specific modelling and periodic model updates. DISCUSSION: We conclude that conducting modelling together with systems development can yield accurate prediction models that may be implemented directly into electronic health records. A prospective study of clinical impact and acceptability is warranted.
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.