Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36017058›Full record

ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2022

Developing and Validating an Emergency Triage Model Using Machine Learning Algorithms with Medical Big Data.

ZhenZhen Gao, Xuan Qi, XingTing Zhang, XinZhen Gao, XinHua He, ShuBin Guo, Peng Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

ZhenZhen Gao *Department of Emergency, Beijing Chao-yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100008, People's Republic of China.
Xuan Qi *Department of Emergency, Beijing Chao-yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100008, People's Republic of China.
XingTing ZhangLIANREN Digital Health Co., Ltd, Beijing, 102208, People's Republic of China.
XinZhen GaoLIANREN Digital Health Co., Ltd, Beijing, 102208, People's Republic of China.
XinHua HeDepartment of Emergency, Beijing Chao-yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100008, People's Republic of China.
ShuBin GuoDepartment of Emergency, Beijing Chao-yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100008, People's Republic of China.
Peng LiDepartment of Emergency, Beijing Chao-yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100008, People's Republic of China.
Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital · CNCapital Medical University · CNDigital China Health (China) · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To establish an emergency triage model through the statistical analysis of big data during a particular time period from a hospital information system to improve the accuracy of triage in emergency department (ED). Methods: A total of 276,164 patients who visited the Emergency Medicine Department of Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital from 2017 to 2020 were included in this study, including 123,392 men and 152,772 women aged from 14 to 112 years. The baseline characteristics (age and gender) and medical records (patient's condition, body temperature, heart rate, breathing, blood pressure, consciousness, and oxygen saturation) of the patients was collected. The data samples were randomly allocated, with 80% as the training set and 20% as the testing set. The patients were divided into levels I, II, III, and IV in accordance with a four-level triage standard. We selected the effective Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) algorithm as our emergency classification prediction model. The XGBoost model was applied to simulate the thinking process of triage nurses, and the De Long's test was used to compare the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of different models. The Results: Level I had 4960 (1.8%) patients, level II had 25,646 (9.29%), level III had 130,664 (47.31%), and level IV had 114,894 (41.6%). The XGBoost model was built following a logic exercise based on the traditional manual pre-inspection and triage results. After verification, the prediction accuracy was 82.57%. The AUC of each disease severity level (levels I, II, III, and IV) was 0.9629, 0.9554, 0.9120, and 0.9296, respectively. Conclusion: The emergency triage prediction model, which achieved a relatively strong accuracy rate, can reduce the work intensity of medical workers and improve their working efficiency.

Indexed as

emergencytriagetriage modelXGBoost model

Identifiers

PMID36017058
PMCPMC9398516
OpenAlexW4292335772

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 OpenQuestion graph.