Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40968272›Full record

ArticleNature medicine2025

Clinical implementation of an AI-based prediction model for decision support for patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery.

Andreas Weinberger Rosen, Ilze Ose, Mikail Gögenur, Lars Peter Kloster Andersen, Rasmus Dahlin Bojesen, Rasmus Peuliche Vogelsang, Martin Høyer Rose, Philip Wallentin Steenfos, Lasse Bremholm Hansen, Helle Skadborg Spuur and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Machine Learning Models for Predicting Pain, Fatigue, Depression, Anxiety, and Malnutrition in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. From Integrated Care to Learning Systems.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. State of clinical AI in 2026.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026
    Review
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

18 authors.

Andreas Weinberger Rosen *Department of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark. anwr@regionsjaelland.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9990-8155
Ilze Ose *Department of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark. ilos@regionsjaelland.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7018-9414
Mikail GögenurDepartment of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7768-324X
Lars Peter Kloster AndersenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.
Rasmus Dahlin BojesenDepartment of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.
Rasmus Peuliche VogelsangDepartment of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.
Martin Høyer RoseDepartment of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-9187-6620
Philip Wallentin SteenfosDepartment of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.
Lasse Bremholm HansenDepartment of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.
Helle Skadborg SpuurDepartment of Physiotherapy, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.
Ines RabenDepartment of Medicine, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.
Søren Thorgaard SkouDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, Center for Muscle and Joint Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4336-7059
Ellen Astrid HolmDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Karina MortensenDepartment of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.
Trine KjærDepartment of Public Health, Danish Centre for Health Economics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Jens Ravn EriksenDepartment of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.
AID-SURG study group
Ismail GögenurDepartment of Surgery, Center for Surgical Science, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark.

Funding

Aage og Johanne Louis-Hansens Fond (Aage and Johanne Louis-Hansen Foundation) 23-2B-14410Novo Nordisk Fonden (Novo Nordisk Foundation) NNF21OC0069821
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adverse outcomes after elective cancer surgery are a main contributor to decreased survival, poorer oncological outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Identifying high-risk patients and selecting interventions according to individual risk profiles in the perioperative period in cancer surgery is a challenge. Using real-world data on 18,403 patients with colorectal cancer from Danish national registries and consecutive patients from a single center, we developed, validated and implemented an artificial-intelligence-based risk prediction model in clinical practice as a decision support tool for personalized perioperative treatment. Personalized treatment pathways were designed according to the predicted risk of 1-year mortality with the intensity of interventions increasing with the predicted risk. The developed model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.79 in the validation set. Results from the nonrandomized before/after cohort study showed an incidence proportion of the comprehensive complication index >20 of 19.1% in the personalized treatment group versus 28.0% in the standard-of-care group, adjusted odds ratio of 0.63 (95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.92; P = 0.02). The incidence of any medical complication was 23.7% in the personalized treatment group and 37.3% in the standard-of-care group; odds ratio of 0.53 (95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.76; P < 0.001). According to the short-term health economic modeling, personalized perioperative treatment was cost effective. The study demonstrates a fully scalable registry-based approach for using readily available data in an artificial-intelligence-based decision support pipeline in clinical practice. Our results indicate that this specific approach can be a cost-effective strategy to improve key surgical clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceColorectal NeoplasmsDecision Support TechniquesAgedDenmarkFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrecision MedicineRegistriesRisk AssessmentROC Curve

Identifiers

PMID40968272
PMCPMC12618259

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.