Observational studyScientific reports2026
Computer vision for pain detection during procedural sedation.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Continual automated pain detection from facial expressions using computer vision during procedural sedation could optimize sedation dose titration and minimize pain. A prospective observational study was conducted. Participants' faces were recorded during interventional radiology procedures performed with procedural sedation. Simultaneous pain assessments were made by a nurse using a sedation state assessment scale. Videos from 70 participants were used to train and evaluate a pain detection model using the Swin Transformer architecture. The model demonstrated an Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC) of 0.79 and an Area Under the Precision-Recall Curve (AP) of 0.53. The model reliably identified pain events for many participants, with sharp increases in predicted probabilities closely aligning with actual pain occurrences. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested variability in performance across Fitzpatrick skin tone categories (highest in categories 3-4), but subgroup sizes were limited and these findings require validation in larger, independent cohorts. Automated pain detection systems for procedural sedation using this model would require a high threshold that minimizes false-positive alerts for pain to limit the risk of alarm fatigue. Alternatively, user interfaces that display predicted probabilities over time without alerts may be preferable until further refinements are made to enhance model performance and fairness across the diverse population of patients who receive procedural sedation.
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.