ReviewEClinicalMedicine2026
Artificial intelligence in surgical care within low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review of development, validation, and deployment.
Review in EClinicalMedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for Improving the Management of People With Epilepsy in Low-and-Middle Income Countries.European journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Lessons learned from the validation of a machine learning-based colorectal carcinoma screening pipeline in sub-Saharan Africa.Journal of pathology informatics · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Healthcare Policy: A Bibliometric Analysis of Global Research Trends.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to expand access to high-quality surgical care in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), yet the extent and maturity of AI research in these settings remain unclear. We conducted a prospectively registered scoping review (osf.io/9PV6A) to synthesize primary evidence on the use of AI in LMIC surgical care. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies evaluating AI in surgical contexts within LMICs up to July 14, 2025. From 2602 records, 475 studies met inclusion criteria. Most were conducted in upper-middle-income countries (n = 376, 79·1%), with the overwhelming majority from China (n = 305, 64·2%). Only 46 studies (9·7%) were conducted in lower-middle-income countries and 5 (1·1%) in low-income countries. Research was predominantly retrospective (68%), and only nine randomised controlled trials were identified (2%). Most studies focused on model development (67%), with few reporting external validation (30%) or clinical deployment (3%), mostly as pilot trial-based integrations. Barriers to AI implementation included fragmented data systems, limited infrastructure, and workforce constraints. Facilitators included widespread smartphone access and growing international collaborations. Despite rapid growth, AI research remains in the early stages of development. Focus on model accuracy alone is insufficient if health systems lack the capacity for adoption and integration.
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.