ReviewCureus2025
A Systematic Literature Review of Precision Anesthesia Through Machine Learning: Automated Drug Titration and Real-Time Physiologic Optimization.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comments on "Forecasting anesthetic depth using an auto regressive transformer in propofol infusion during the induction phase" by Chi et al.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Article
- Explainable artificial intelligence in anesthesiology prediction models: bridging the gap from black-box algorithms to clinical decision support.Frontiers in medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into anesthesia practice represents a paradigm shift toward precision medicine by enabling automated, data-driven decision-making during surgery. This systematic review aimed to evaluate current applications of ML for automated drug titration and real-time physiologic optimization in anesthesia. A comprehensive literature search, adhering to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines, was performed across five databases (SciSpace, Google Scholar, PubMed, ArXiv, and Scopus) for studies published between 2010 and 2025. Eligible studies examined ML- or AI-based systems for closed-loop anesthesia control, individualized dosing, or physiologic monitoring in either clinical environments or validated simulation settings. Of the 245 studies initially identified, 26 met the inclusion criteria after title and abstract screening. The most commonly used ML architectures included reinforcement learning (RL), convolutional neural networks (CNNs), and ensemble tree-based methods. Key applications included closed-loop propofol infusion control, multimodal signal integration for depth-of-anesthesia assessment, and adaptive physiologic optimization systems. ML-guided controllers demonstrated superior performance in target maintenance, dosing precision, and physiologic stability compared to conventional proportional-integral-derivative (PID) algorithms. Despite these promising findings, most studies relied on retrospective data or simulation-based testing, with only a small number advancing to prospective clinical evaluation. While ML-enabled precision anesthesia shows substantial promise for improving dosing accuracy, patient safety, and intraoperative efficiency, broad adoption will depend on rigorous clinical validation, clear regulatory pathways, and strong safety frameworks to ensure dependable performance in real-world 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.