Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38096321›Full record

ReviewPloS one2023

Applications of natural language processing at emergency department triage: A narrative review.

Jonathon Stewart, Juan Lu, Adrian Goudie, Glenn Arendts, Shiv Akarsh Meka, Sam Freeman, Katie Walker, Peter Sprivulis, Frank Sanfilippo, Mohammed Bennamoun and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Jonathon StewartSchool of Medicine, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7322-0106
Juan LuSchool of Medicine, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
Adrian GoudieDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.
Glenn ArendtsSchool of Medicine, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
Shiv Akarsh MekaHIVE & Data and Digital Innovation, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Sam FreemanDepartment of Emergency Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Katie WalkerSchool of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Peter SprivulisWestern Australia Department of Health, East Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Frank SanfilippoSchool of Population and Global Health, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
Mohammed BennamounDepartment of Computer Science and Software Engineering, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6603-3257
Girish DwivediSchool of Medicine, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0717-740X
The University of Western Australia · AUFiona Stanley Hospital · AUGovernment of Western Australia Department of Health · AUMonash Health · AURoyal Perth Hospital · AUSt Vincent's Hospital Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionNatural language processing (NLP) uses various computational methods to analyse and understand human language, and has been applied to data acquired at Emergency Department (ED) triage to predict various outcomes. The objective of this scoping review is to evaluate how NLP has been applied to data acquired at ED triage, assess if NLP based models outperform humans or current risk stratification techniques when predicting outcomes, and assess if incorporating free-text improve predictive performance of models when compared to predictive models that use only structured data.

methodsAll English language peer-reviewed research that applied an NLP technique to free-text obtained at ED triage was eligible for inclusion. We excluded studies focusing solely on disease surveillance, and studies that used information obtained after triage. We searched the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and Scopus for medical subject headings and text keywords related to NLP and triage. Databases were last searched on 01/01/2022. Risk of bias in studies was assessed using the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Due to the high level of heterogeneity between studies and high risk of bias, a metanalysis was not conducted. Instead, a narrative synthesis is provided.

resultsIn total, 3730 studies were screened, and 20 studies were included. The population size varied greatly between studies ranging from 1.8 million patients to 598 triage notes. The most common outcomes assessed were prediction of triage score, prediction of admission, and prediction of critical illness. NLP models achieved high accuracy in predicting need for admission, triage score, critical illness, and mapping free-text chief complaints to structured fields. Incorporating both structured data and free-text data improved results when compared to models that used only structured data. However, the majority of studies (80%) were assessed to have a high risk of bias, and only one study reported the deployment of an NLP model into clinical practice.

conclusionUnstructured free-text triage notes have been used by NLP models to predict clinically relevant outcomes. However, the majority of studies have a high risk of bias, most research is retrospective, and there are few examples of implementation into clinical practice. Future work is needed to prospectively assess if applying NLP to data acquired at ED triage improves ED outcomes when compared to usual clinical practice.

Indexed as

Natural Language ProcessingTriageCritical IllnessEmergency Service, HospitalRetrospective StudiesSystematic Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID38096321
PMCPMC10721204
OpenAlexW4389767559

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.