ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2026
Artificial Intelligence and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery as Patient Safety Strategies for Perioperative Care in Resource-Limited Settings.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 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
Artificial intelligence (AI) and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) are increasingly discussed as strategies for improving perioperative quality, efficiency, and recovery, but their implementation in resource limited settings requires a clear patient safety framework. In this commentary, resource limited settings refer to perioperative systems constrained by shortages of trained workforce, essential equipment, monitoring capacity, reliable data infrastructure, financing, or governance support. This commentary argues that AI and ERAS should be viewed as complementary rather than competing approaches. ERAS provides a structured pathway for standardizing perioperative care, while AI may support risk stratification, clinical decision support, monitoring, adherence tracking, and operational efficiency. Perioperative care is a suitable field for AI integration because it is time-sensitive, multidisciplinary, data-rich, and highly dependent on coordinated decisions across the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative continuum. However, digital tools cannot compensate for absent safety infrastructure, weak governance, or poor-quality data. A pragmatic strategy for low-resource settings is therefore to first establish essential perioperative safety standards, implement context-adapted ERAS elements, and then selectively deploy ethically governed AI applications with human oversight and local validation. Framed in this way, AI-supported ERAS pathways may strengthen patient safety, recovery, and risk management while supporting broader health system resilience.
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.