ReviewUnfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
[Generative artificial intelligence and language models in trauma surgery : Applications in clinical care, research and teaching].
Review in Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany), 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGenerative artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLM) are evolving from general purpose text assistants toward increasingly contextualized, multimodal systems integrated into clinical workflows.
objectivePresentation of current applications of generative AI and LLMs in trauma surgery, with a focus on clinical care and additional aspects of research and teaching. MATERIAL AND
methodsNarrative literature review based on a MEDLINE/PubMed search and supplementary hand search, including primary regulatory sources.
resultsThe most immediate clinical potential currently lies in documentation, information processing and patient communication. Initial studies demonstrate relevant time savings with AI-assisted documentation. Current systems achieve high performance in some clearly defined triage and decision-support tasks, whereas complex individualized and multimodal applications show lower and more heterogeneous reliability. In research and teaching LLMs can support standardized workflows, case generation and learning activities; however, the available evidence is still frequently based on retrospective or simulated studies.
conclusionThe safe implementation requires validation of the specific AI system in its intended context of use, reliable knowledge sources, sufficient clinical context, data protection and effective human control. As the clinical consequences of AI-generated outputs increase, so do the requirements for validation and physician responsibility in making decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42776181What 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.