Artificial intelligence in resuscitation: a scoping review

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Drieda Zace , Federico Semeraro , Sebastian Schnaubelt , Jonathan Montomoli , Giuseppe Ristagno , Nino Fijačko , Lorenzo Gamberini , Elena G. Bignami , Robert Greif , Koenraad G. Monsieurs , Andrea Scapigliati
{"title":"Artificial intelligence in resuscitation: a scoping review","authors":"Drieda Zace ,&nbsp;Federico Semeraro ,&nbsp;Sebastian Schnaubelt ,&nbsp;Jonathan Montomoli ,&nbsp;Giuseppe Ristagno ,&nbsp;Nino Fijačko ,&nbsp;Lorenzo Gamberini ,&nbsp;Elena G. Bignami ,&nbsp;Robert Greif ,&nbsp;Koenraad G. Monsieurs ,&nbsp;Andrea Scapigliati","doi":"10.1016/j.resplu.2025.100973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly applied in medicine, with growing interest in its potential to improve outcomes in cardiac arrest (CA). However, the scope and characteristics of current AI applications in resuscitation remain unclear.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This scoping review aims to map the existing literature on AI applications in CA and resuscitation and identify research gaps for further investigation. PRISMA-ScR framework and ILCOR guidelines were followed. A systematic literature search across PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane identified AI applications in resuscitation. Articles were screened and classified by AI methodology, study design, outcomes, and implementation settings. AI-assisted data extraction was manually validated for accuracy.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Out of 4046 records, 197 studies met inclusion criteria. Most were retrospective (90%), with only 16 prospective studies and 2 randomised controlled trials. AI was predominantly applied in prediction of CA, rhythm classification, and post-resuscitation outcome prognostication. Machine learning was the most commonly used method (50% of studies), followed by deep learning and, less frequently, natural language processing. Reported performance was generally high, with AUROC values often exceeding 0.85; however, external validation was rare and real-world implementation limited.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>While AI applications in resuscitation demonstrate encouraging performance in prediction and decision support tasks, clear evidence of improved patient outcomes or routine clinical use remains limited. Future research should focus on prospective validation, equity in data sources, explainability, and seamless integration of AI tools into clinical workflows.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":94192,"journal":{"name":"Resuscitation plus","volume":"24 ","pages":"Article 100973"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resuscitation plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666520425001109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly applied in medicine, with growing interest in its potential to improve outcomes in cardiac arrest (CA). However, the scope and characteristics of current AI applications in resuscitation remain unclear.

Methods

This scoping review aims to map the existing literature on AI applications in CA and resuscitation and identify research gaps for further investigation. PRISMA-ScR framework and ILCOR guidelines were followed. A systematic literature search across PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane identified AI applications in resuscitation. Articles were screened and classified by AI methodology, study design, outcomes, and implementation settings. AI-assisted data extraction was manually validated for accuracy.

Results

Out of 4046 records, 197 studies met inclusion criteria. Most were retrospective (90%), with only 16 prospective studies and 2 randomised controlled trials. AI was predominantly applied in prediction of CA, rhythm classification, and post-resuscitation outcome prognostication. Machine learning was the most commonly used method (50% of studies), followed by deep learning and, less frequently, natural language processing. Reported performance was generally high, with AUROC values often exceeding 0.85; however, external validation was rare and real-world implementation limited.

Conclusions

While AI applications in resuscitation demonstrate encouraging performance in prediction and decision support tasks, clear evidence of improved patient outcomes or routine clinical use remains limited. Future research should focus on prospective validation, equity in data sources, explainability, and seamless integration of AI tools into clinical workflows.
人工智能在复苏:范围审查
人工智能(AI)在医学上的应用越来越多,人们对其改善心脏骤停(CA)结果的潜力越来越感兴趣。然而,目前人工智能在复苏中的应用范围和特点仍不清楚。方法本综述的目的是绘制人工智能在CA和复苏中的应用的现有文献,并确定进一步研究的研究空白。遵循PRISMA-ScR框架和ILCOR指南。通过对PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane的系统文献检索,确定了人工智能在复苏中的应用。文章根据人工智能方法、研究设计、结果和实施设置进行筛选和分类。人工智能辅助数据提取的准确性由人工验证。结果4046篇文献中,197篇符合纳入标准。大多数是回顾性研究(90%),只有16项前瞻性研究和2项随机对照试验。人工智能主要应用于CA预测、心律分类和复苏后预后预测。机器学习是最常用的方法(50%的研究),其次是深度学习,自然语言处理(不太常见)。报告的表现普遍较高,AUROC值通常超过0.85;然而,外部验证是罕见的,现实世界的实现是有限的。尽管人工智能在复苏中的应用在预测和决策支持任务方面表现令人鼓舞,但改善患者预后或常规临床应用的明确证据仍然有限。未来的研究应侧重于前瞻性验证、数据来源的公平性、可解释性以及将人工智能工具无缝集成到临床工作流程中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Resuscitation plus
Resuscitation plus Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
52 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信