ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2026
From promising prototypes to "instructions for use": embedding LLMs safely in perioperative and intensive care.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) show promise for supporting clinical decision‑making in perioperative and intensive care settings. The recent study by Xu et al. on pre‑trained language models for preoperative anesthesia triage demonstrates that such models can effectively integrate structured and unstructured clinical data to support triage decisions. However, the translation of these tools from research prototypes to routine clinical use requires more than technical validation; it demands explicit, operationalised “instructions for use” analogous to those required for pharmaceuticals and medical devices. We argue that responsible deployment of LLMs in ICU and perioperative workflows must clarify: (1) intended clinical scope and non‑indications; (2) role in the decision‑making hierarchy and when clinicians should override model recommendations; and (3) mechanisms for transparency, governance, and staff training. Drawing on Xu et al.‘s methodological rigor and Bignami et al.‘s AI policy checklist framework, we outline a concise, practice‑oriented approach to embedding LLMs safely in critical care. We emphasise that without explicit instructions for use, clear governance structures, and comprehensive training, there is a risk of introducing inscrutable systems into the heart of critical care. The time to define these safeguards is now, before ad hoc, ungoverned adoption becomes the norm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.