Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41669936›Full record

ArticleCurrent opinion in anaesthesiology2026

Artificial intelligence in trauma care: applications, ethical challenges, and pathways toward responsible integration.

Elena Giovanna Bignami, Michele Berdini, Valentina Bellini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current opinion in anaesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Elena Giovanna BignamiAnesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine Division, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Michele Berdini
Valentina Bellini

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewArtificial intelligence is increasingly applied across the trauma care continuum, from prehospital triage to in-hospital decision-making. This review provides a timely synthesis of emerging applications, ethical challenges, and regulatory frameworks shaping the responsible integration of artificial intelligence into trauma systems. RECENT

findingsRecent studies highlight the potential of machine learning and deep learning models to improve trauma triage accuracy, imaging interpretation, and prediction of hemorrhage and transfusion needs. Despite promising accuracy, most systems remain in proof-of-concept phases with limited external validation. Ethical and governance challenges - particularly regarding data privacy, transparency, accountability, and automation bias - remain major barriers to clinical translation. The WHO guidance on artificial intelligence ethics and the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act establish core principles of safety, fairness, and human oversight, framing the foundation for trustworthy implementation. SUMMARY: Artificial intelligence offers transformative opportunities for trauma care but requires rigorous validation, transparent governance, and structured clinician training to ensure safe, equitable, and ethically aligned deployment. Responsible, human-centered integration - anchored in oversight, algorithmic stewardship, and interdisciplinary collaboration - will be key to realizing full potential of artificial intelligence in trauma medicine.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceethicsgovernancemachine learningtrauma

Identifiers

PMID41669936
PMCPMC12931847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.