ReviewCureus2026
Performance of an Automated Algorithm Grading Surgery-Related Adverse Events According to the Clavien-Dindo Classification: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Postoperative adverse events (AEs) significantly impact patient outcomes and healthcare resources. The Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC) is widely used to grade surgical complications, but manual grading is labor-intensive and subject to inter-observer variability. Automated algorithms, including rule-based, machine learning (ML), and large language model (LLM)-based natural language processing (NLP) tools, offer scalable solutions for consistent complication grading. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Studies reporting automated grading of surgery-related AEs using the CDC as a reference, with human validation, were included. Data extraction covered algorithm type, sample size, surgical population, comparator, data source, performance metrics, and outcomes. Three studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing a total of 1,661 surgical cases. Automated algorithms for Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC) grading including rule-based systems, machine-learning (ML) models, and large language model (LLM)/natural language processing (NLP) approaches demonstrate high agreement with expert reviewers, with rule-based algorithms achieving Cohen's κ up to 0.89, ML prediction models reporting discrimination up to an AUC of 0.863 for severe (CDC ≥ III) complications, and LLM/NLP approaches reaching accuracy of approximately 97% and Cohen's κ up to 0.92. Together, these methods show potential for scalable and, in some settings, near-real-time postoperative complication monitoring. These tools may support clinical decision-making, research, and quality improvement with promising but preliminary applicability across surgical domains. However, conclusions are limited by the small number of available studies and heterogeneity in surgical 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.