Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34716472›Full record

SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022

Machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery-a systematic literature review.

Jonas Henn, Andreas Buness, Matthias Schmid, Jörg C Kalff, Hanno Matthaei

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. German surgeons' perspective on the application of artificial intelligence in clinical decision-making.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jonas HennDepartment of General, Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Andreas BunessInstitute for Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Matthias SchmidInstitute for Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Jörg C KalffDepartment of General, Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Hanno MatthaeiDepartment of General, Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany. hanno.matthaei@ukbonn.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5499-9847

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAn indication for surgical therapy includes balancing benefits against risk, which remains a key task in all surgical disciplines. Decisions are oftentimes based on clinical experience while guidelines lack evidence-based background. Various medical fields capitalized the application of machine learning (ML), and preliminary research suggests promising implications in surgeons' workflow. Hence, we evaluated ML's contemporary and possible future role in clinical decision-making (CDM) focusing on abdominal surgery.

methodsUsing the PICO framework, relevant keywords and research questions were identified. Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systemic search strategy in the PubMed database was conducted. Results were filtered by distinct criteria and selected articles were manually full text reviewed.

resultsLiterature review revealed 4,396 articles, of which 47 matched the search criteria. The mean number of patients included was 55,843. A total of eight distinct ML techniques were evaluated whereas AUROC was applied by most authors for comparing ML predictions vs. conventional CDM routines. Most authors (N = 30/47, 63.8%) stated ML's superiority in the prediction of benefits and risks of surgery. The identification of highly relevant parameters to be integrated into algorithms allowing a more precise prognosis was emphasized as the main advantage of ML in CDM.

conclusionsA potential value of ML for surgical decision-making was demonstrated in several scientific articles. However, the low number of publications with only few collaborative studies between surgeons and computer scientists underpins the early phase of this highly promising field. Interdisciplinary research initiatives combining existing clinical datasets and emerging techniques of data processing may likely improve CDM in abdominal surgery in the future.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingMachine LearningAlgorithmsDatabases, FactualHumansAbdominal surgeryClinical decision-makingDigitalizationMachine learningPostoperative complicationsRisk prediction

Identifiers

PMID34716472
PMCPMC8847247

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.