ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2026
A pre-trained language model approach for triaging surgical patients for preoperative anesthesia clinics.
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.
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.
- From promising prototypes to "instructions for use": embedding LLMs safely in perioperative and intensive care.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePreoperative anesthesia evaluation is a crucial step in ensuring patient safety and optimizing perioperative care. A heterogenous patient population requiring varying levels of assessment often leads to inefficiencies and additional resource allocation. This study proposes using pre-trained language models to assist in triaging the appropriate degree of preoperative anesthesia evaluation for surgical patients.
methodsRetrospective institutional data were obtained from surgical patients evaluated at a single center preoperative anesthesia care clinic. The performance of four pre-trained language models (RoBERTa, BERT, ClinicalBERT, and PubMedBERT) in the classification of which patients would be appropriate for a nursing preoperative phone call versus in-person clinician evaluation was assessed using F1-score, area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC), specificity, sensitivity, and average precision. For each pre-trained language model, three different data input combinations were assessed: (1) diagnosis codes (D); (2) clinical text data (N); and (3) diagnosis codes and clinical text (D + N). The data were split into training (75%) and test set (25%).
resultsThere were 1,761 unique patients, with an average of 12 notes per patient and a total of 46,922 clinical documents, included in the analysis. The AUC range between the four language models was highest in the D + N analyses (0.70 - 0.74), lower in the N analyses (0.58 - 0.73) and lowest in the D analyses (0.57 - 0.62). RoBERTa had the highest score compared to the other language models for all data types.
conclusionsAutomating integrated analysis using pre-trained language models to aid in preoperative triaging could enhance accuracy and efficiency at scale, reducing manual review and provider burden.
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.