Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39695961›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2024

Using machine learning and natural language processing in triage for prediction of clinical disposition in the emergency department.

Yu-Hsin Chang, Ying-Chen Lin, Fen-Wei Huang, Dar-Min Chen, Yu-Ting Chung, Wei-Kung Chen, Charles C N Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

Yu-Hsin ChangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, China Medical University Hospital, No. 2, Yude Rd., North Dist, Taichung City, 40447, Taiwan.
Ying-Chen LinInstitute of Information Science and Engineering, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, No. 1001, Daxue Rd. East Dist, Hsinchu City, 300093, Taiwan.
Fen-Wei HuangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, China Medical University Hospital, No. 2, Yude Rd., North Dist, Taichung City, 40447, Taiwan.
Dar-Min ChenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Asia University Hospital, No. 222, Fuxin Rd., Wufeng Dist, Taichung City, 413505, Taiwan.
Yu-Ting ChungDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Asia University Hospital, No. 222, Fuxin Rd., Wufeng Dist, Taichung City, 413505, Taiwan.
Wei-Kung ChenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, China Medical University Hospital, No. 2, Yude Rd., North Dist, Taichung City, 40447, Taiwan. ercwk@mail.cmuh.org.tw.
Charles C N WangDepartment of Bioinformatics and Medical Engineering, Asia University, No. 500, Liufeng Rd., Wufeng Dist, Taichung City, 413305, Taiwan. cnwang@asia.edu.tw.

Funding

Asia University ASIA-112-CMUH-07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate triage is required for efficient allocation of resources and to decrease patients' length of stay. Triage decisions are often subjective and vary by provider, leading to patients being over-triaged or under-triaged. This study developed machine learning models that incorporated natural language processing (NLP) to predict patient disposition. The models were assessed by comparing their performance with the judgements of emergency physicians (EPs).

methodThis retrospective study obtained data from patients visiting EDs between January 2018 and December 2019. Internal validation data came from China Medical University Hospital (CMUH), while external validation data were obtained from Asia University Hospital (AUH). Nontrauma patients aged ≥ 20 years were included. The models were trained using structured data and unstructured data (free-text notes) processed by NLP. The primary outcome was death in the ED or admission to the intensive care unit, and the secondary outcome was either admission to a general ward or transferal to another hospital. Six machine learning models (CatBoost, Light Gradient Boosting Machine, Logistic Regression, Random Forest, Extremely Randomized Trees, and Gradient Boosting) and one Logistic Regression derived from triage level were developed and evaluated using EPs' predictions as reference.

resultA total of 17,2101 and 41,883 patients were enrolled from CMUH and AUH, respectively. EPs achieved F1 core of 0.361 and 0.498 for the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. All machine learning models achieved higher F1 scores compared to EPs and Logistic Regression derived from triage level. Random Forest was selected for further evaluation and fine-tuning, because of its robust calibration and predictive performance. In internal validation, it achieved Brier scores of 0.072 and 0.089 for the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively, and 0.076 and 0.095 in external validation. Further analysis revealed that incorporating unstructured data significantly enhanced the model's performance. Threshold adjustments were applied to improve clinical applicability, aiming to balance the trade-off between sensitivity and positive predictive value.

conclusionThis study developed and validated machine learning models that integrate structured and unstructured triage data to predict patient dispositions, distinguishing between general ward and critical conditions like ICU admissions and ED deaths. Integrating both structured and unstructured data significantly improved model performance.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalMachine LearningNatural Language ProcessingTriageAdultAgedChinaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesDisposition PredictionEmergency DepartmentMachine LearningNatural Language ProcessingTriage

Identifiers

PMID39695961
PMCPMC11657801

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.