ArticleScientific reports2024
Machine learning in diagnostic support in medical emergency departments.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- 14,441 Genomics-Based Validated Automated Comprehensive Clinicopathologic Correlations for Myeloid Neoplasms.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Article
- Predicting Inpatient Admissions From Emergency Department Triage Using Machine Learning: A Systematic Review.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Review
- Mapping artificial intelligence models in emergency medicine: A scoping review on artificial intelligence performance in emergency care and education.Turkish journal of emergency medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Diagnosing patients in the medical emergency department is complex and this is expected to increase in many countries due to an ageing population. In this study we investigate the feasibility of training machine learning algorithms to assist physicians handling the complex situation in the medical emergency departments. This is expected to reduce diagnostic errors and improve patient logistics and outcome. We included a total of 9,190 consecutive patient admissions diagnosed and treated in two hospitals in this cohort study. Patients had a biochemical workup including blood and urine analyses on clinical decision totaling 260 analyses. After adding nurse-registered data we trained 19 machine learning algorithms on a random 80% sample of the patients and validated the results on the remaining 20%. We trained algorithms for 19 different patient outcomes including the main outcomes death in 7 (Area under the Curve (AUC) 91.4%) and 30 days (AUC 91.3%) and safe-discharge(AUC 87.3%). The various algorithms obtained areas under the Receiver Operating Characteristics -curves in the range of 71.8-96.3% in the holdout cohort (68.3-98.2% in the training cohort). Performing this list of biochemical analyses at admission also reduced the number of subsequent venipunctures within 24 h from patient admittance by 22%. We have shown that it is possible to develop a list of machine-learning algorithms with high AUC for use in medical emergency departments. Moreover, the study showed that it is possible to reduce the number of venipunctures in this cohort.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.