Artificial intelligence-assisted perioperative risk prediction, decision support, and supervised automation in anesthesia: A narrative review.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Journal of International Medical Research Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-09-29 DOI:10.1177/03000605261491422
Ran An, Bingbing Meng, Xun Lu
{"title":"Artificial intelligence-assisted perioperative risk prediction, decision support, and supervised automation in anesthesia: A narrative review.","authors":"Ran An, Bingbing Meng, Xun Lu","doi":"10.1177/03000605261491422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificial intelligence is increasingly being investigated as a tool for supporting personalized perioperative care. This narrative review, guided by the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles principles, examines clinically relevant applications of artificial intelligence and related automation in anesthesiology, with emphasis on three linked functions: risk prediction, clinical decision support, and supervised automation. We performed a structured search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases and identified English-language literature published from January 2010 through June 2026. We prioritized clinical studies, guidelines, systematic reviews, and representative methodological studies. A central distinction of this review is that machine-learning prediction, rule-based decision support, conventional feedback control, and genuinely adaptive artificial intelligence-enabled control are not treated as equivalent technologies. Current evidence is strongest for selected prediction tasks and supervised systems that improve process measures such as time within a physiological target range. However, evidence that these technologies improve patient-centered outcomes remains less consistent. Model discrimination alone is insufficient; calibration, actionable thresholds, false-positive burden, external validation, clinical utility, dataset shift, missing data, and workflow consequences must also be considered. The proposed three-level framework is intended to provide anesthesiologists and perioperative teams with a practical way to connect technical capability with bedside action. Near-term implementation should prioritize interpretable prediction and low-burden decision support, whereas closed-loop systems should remain under clinician supervision. Future studies should emphasize prospective multicenter validation, clinically meaningful endpoints, transparent reporting, and post-deployment monitoring rather than technical performance alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":16129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Medical Research","volume":"54 9","pages":"3000605261491422"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03000605261491422","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/9/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Artificial intelligence is increasingly being investigated as a tool for supporting personalized perioperative care. This narrative review, guided by the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles principles, examines clinically relevant applications of artificial intelligence and related automation in anesthesiology, with emphasis on three linked functions: risk prediction, clinical decision support, and supervised automation. We performed a structured search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases and identified English-language literature published from January 2010 through June 2026. We prioritized clinical studies, guidelines, systematic reviews, and representative methodological studies. A central distinction of this review is that machine-learning prediction, rule-based decision support, conventional feedback control, and genuinely adaptive artificial intelligence-enabled control are not treated as equivalent technologies. Current evidence is strongest for selected prediction tasks and supervised systems that improve process measures such as time within a physiological target range. However, evidence that these technologies improve patient-centered outcomes remains less consistent. Model discrimination alone is insufficient; calibration, actionable thresholds, false-positive burden, external validation, clinical utility, dataset shift, missing data, and workflow consequences must also be considered. The proposed three-level framework is intended to provide anesthesiologists and perioperative teams with a practical way to connect technical capability with bedside action. Near-term implementation should prioritize interpretable prediction and low-burden decision support, whereas closed-loop systems should remain under clinician supervision. Future studies should emphasize prospective multicenter validation, clinically meaningful endpoints, transparent reporting, and post-deployment monitoring rather than technical performance alone.

人工智能辅助围手术期风险预测、决策支持和麻醉监督自动化:叙述性回顾。
人工智能作为一种支持个性化围手术期护理的工具正越来越多地被研究。本叙述性综述在叙述性综述文章评估量表原则的指导下,研究了人工智能和相关自动化在麻醉学中的临床相关应用,重点关注三个相关功能:风险预测、临床决策支持和监督自动化。我们对PubMed、Web of Science和Scopus数据库进行了结构化搜索,并确定了从2010年1月到2026年6月发表的英语文献。我们优先考虑临床研究、指南、系统评价和有代表性的方法学研究。这篇综述的一个核心区别是,机器学习预测、基于规则的决策支持、传统的反馈控制和真正自适应的人工智能控制不被视为等同的技术。目前的证据是最强有力的选择预测任务和监督系统,改善过程措施,如生理目标范围内的时间。然而,这些技术改善以患者为中心的结果的证据仍然不太一致。仅靠模式歧视是不够的;还必须考虑校准、可操作阈值、假阳性负担、外部验证、临床效用、数据集移位、缺失数据和工作流程后果。提出的三级框架旨在为麻醉师和围手术期团队提供一种将技术能力与床边行动联系起来的实用方法。近期实施应优先考虑可解释的预测和低负担的决策支持,而闭环系统应保持在临床医生的监督下。未来的研究应强调前瞻性多中心验证、临床有意义的终点、透明报告和部署后监测,而不仅仅是技术性能。
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
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
555
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: _Journal of International Medical Research_ is a leading international journal for rapid publication of original medical, pre-clinical and clinical research, reviews, preliminary and pilot studies on a page charge basis. As a service to authors, every article accepted by peer review will be given a full technical edit to make papers as accessible and readable to the international medical community as rapidly as possible. Once the technical edit queries have been answered to the satisfaction of the journal, the paper will be published and made available freely to everyone under a creative commons licence. Symposium proceedings, summaries of presentations or collections of medical, pre-clinical or clinical data on a specific topic are welcome for publication as supplements. Print ISSN: 0300-0605
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书