ReviewCommunications medicine2026
Systemic fragility in European total intravenous anesthesia delivery and opportunities for resilient real-time decision support.
Review in Communications medicine, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) is a well-established technique for general anesthesia and is increasingly relevant to Europe's transition toward more digital, sustainable, and patient-centred healthcare. However, its use remains uneven across centres and still depends heavily on population-based drug models, variable monitoring practices, and repeated clinician adjustment. Differences in training, data access, device compatibility, patient response, and institutional resources can limit safe and consistent personalization. In this Review, we examine the main sources of fragility in current TIVA practice and discuss how interoperable perioperative data, digital patient simulators, patient-adaptive models, multimodal monitoring, and closed-loop decision support could improve safety and resilience. We emphasize that these technologies should support, not replace, the anesthesiologist, and should remain transparent, clinically supervised, and easy to override. We conclude by outlining priorities for European collaboration in data infrastructure, training, validation, regulation, and evaluation of AI-enabled tools.
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.