Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40206990›Full record

ReviewMayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health2025

Predicting Inpatient Admissions From Emergency Department Triage Using Machine Learning: A Systematic Review.

Ethan L Williams, Daniel Huynh, Mohamed Estai, Toshi Sinha, Matthew Summerscales, Yogesan Kanagasingam

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Ethan L WilliamsSchool of Medicine, The University of Notre Dame, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia.
Daniel HuynhGeneral Medicine Department, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.
Mohamed EstaiSchool of Human Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
Toshi SinhaSchool of Medicine, The University of Notre Dame, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia.
Matthew SummerscalesEmergency Department, St John of God Midland Public and Private Hospitals, Midland, Western Australia, Australia.
Yogesan KanagasingamSchool of Medicine, The University of Notre Dame, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the quality of evidence for using machine learning models to predict inpatient admissions from emergency department triage data, ultimately aiming to improve patient flow management. A comprehensive literature search was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines across 5 databases, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL, on August 1, 2024, for English-language studies published between August 1, 2014, and August 1, 2024. This yielded 700 articles, of which 66 were screened in full, and 31 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Model quality was assessed using the PROBAST appraisal tool and a modified TRIPOD+AI framework, alongside reported model performance metrics. Seven studies demonstrated rigorous methodology and promising in silico performance, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic ranging from 0.81 to 0.93. However, further performance analysis was limited by heterogeneity in model development and an unclear-to-high risk of bias and applicability concerns in the remaining 24 articles, as evaluated by the PROBAST tool. The current literature demonstrates a good degree of in silico accuracy in predicting inpatient admission from triage data alone. Future research should emphasize transparent model development and reporting, temporal validation, concept drift analysis, exploration of emerging artificial intelligence techniques, and analysis of real-world patient flow metrics to comprehensively assess the usefulness of these models.

Identifiers

PMID40206990
PMCPMC11975823

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.