A pragmatic risk-stratified framework for using large language models in intensive care medicine: A narrative review

Objective To provide Australian intensive care clinicians with a pragmatic framework for the safe integration of large language models (LLMs) into intensive care unit (ICU) practise, addressing the current lack of Australian-specific guidance and limited local evidence. Design Narrative review. Data sources Peer-reviewed publications, preprints, and policy documents relating to LLM use in health care, with a focus on critical care applications and governance. Review methods Evidence and expert commentary were synthesised to develop a clinician-led, risk-stratified framework for ICU implementation, with emphasis on safety, oversight, and applicability within Australian health systems. Clinical use cases, risks, governance considerations, and practical safeguards for day-to-day ICU practise were identified. Results LLMs have potential utility in data-dense ICU environments, including summarising complex clinical information, supporting documentation, assisting clinical reasoning, and facilitating research tasks. However, evidence for LLM performance in ICU contexts remains limited, particularly in Australia. Key risks include inaccurate or fabricated outputs (“ hallucinations ”), bias, lack of situational awareness, privacy concerns, and over-reliance in high-stakes decision-making. We propose a risk-stratified framework that categorises LLM applications by clinical risk and reversibility, and aligns each category with proportional oversight, verification processes, and governance safeguards, emphasising clinician-in-the-loop decision-making. Conclusions LLMs may serve as adjunctive cognitive tools in Australian ICUs when used in clearly defined, low-to intermediate-risk contexts under clinician oversight. Safe integration requires robust governance frameworks emphasising transparency, data protection, and proportionate clinician decision-making. Further Australian-based evaluation is needed before high-risk clinical applications can be considered for routine practise.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Critical Care and Resuscitation
Published
2026-06-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccrj.2026.100194
Primary Topic
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A pragmatic risk-stratified framework for using large language models in intensive care medicine: A narrative review

Stephen Bacchi, Ashwin Subramaniam, Krishnaswamy Sundararajan, Nilesh Anand Devanand et al.
Critical Care and Resuscitation
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
article

A pragmatic risk-stratified framework for using large language models in intensive care medicine: A narrative review

Stephen Bacchi, Ashwin Subramaniam, Krishnaswamy Sundararajan, Nilesh Anand Devanand, Christopher Bain, Santosh Verghese
article en

Abstract

Objective To provide Australian intensive care clinicians with a pragmatic framework for the safe integration of large language models (LLMs) into intensive care unit (ICU) practise, addressing the current lack of Australian-specific guidance and limited local evidence. Design Narrative review. Data sources Peer-reviewed publications, preprints, and policy documents relating to LLM use in health care, with a focus on critical care applications and governance. Review methods Evidence and expert commentary were synthesised to develop a clinician-led, risk-stratified framework for ICU implementation, with emphasis on safety, oversight, and applicability within Australian health systems. Clinical use cases, risks, governance considerations, and practical safeguards for day-to-day ICU practise were identified. Results LLMs have potential utility in data-dense ICU environments, including summarising complex clinical information, supporting documentation, assisting clinical reasoning, and facilitating research tasks. However, evidence for LLM performance in ICU contexts remains limited, particularly in Australia. Key risks include inaccurate or fabricated outputs (“ hallucinations ”), bias, lack of situational awareness, privacy concerns, and over-reliance in high-stakes decision-making. We propose a risk-stratified framework that categorises LLM applications by clinical risk and reversibility, and aligns each category with proportional oversight, verification processes, and governance safeguards, emphasising clinician-in-the-loop decision-making. Conclusions LLMs may serve as adjunctive cognitive tools in Australian ICUs when used in clearly defined, low-to intermediate-risk contexts under clinician oversight. Safe integration requires robust governance frameworks emphasising transparency, data protection, and proportionate clinician decision-making. Further Australian-based evaluation is needed before high-risk clinical applications can be considered for routine practise.

Critical Care and ResuscitationVol. 28(3)
Royal Adelaide Hospital (AU), Lyell McEwin Hospital (AU), Flinders Medical Centre (AU), Women's and Children's Health Network (AU), Peninsula Health (AU), Monash Health (AU), South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (AU), Dandenong Hospital (AU), Monash University (AU), The University of Adelaide (AU)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.