ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Patient Triage and Guidance in Emergency Departments Using Large Language Models: Multimetric Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Accuracy of the large language model ChatGPT in adult emergency department triage: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence for prediction of clinical response and therapeutic value in interventional pain management: a scoping review.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Pooled it
- A Multiagent Large Language Model Framework for Emergency Treatment Recommendation in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Development and Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Initial-Visit Specialty Triage in Rare Diseases Using Large Language Models: Retrospective Benchmarking Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Personal Health Large Language Models and the Negotiation of Medical Authority in Clinical Care: Opportunities, Risks, and Governance.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence across the cardiovascular diagnostic pathway: a case-based narrative review.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2026Review
- Article
- Is Artificial Intelligence Ready for Emergency Department Triage? A Retrospective Evaluation of Multiple Large Language Models in 39,375 Patients at a University Emergency Department.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Perceptions and attitudes of emergency department nurses toward artificial intelligence applications in triage: a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-assisted multidisciplinary therapy for a complex case of cholangitis with septic shock: a case report and simulated decision-making analysis.AME case reports · 2026Article
- An Evaluation Framework for Large Language Models in Clinical Nursing: A Scoping Review and Expert Consultation.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmergency departments (EDs) face significant challenges due to overcrowding, prolonged waiting times, and staff shortages, leading to increased strain on health care systems. Efficient triage systems and accurate departmental guidance are critical for alleviating these pressures. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, offer potential solutions for improving patient triage and outpatient department selection in emergency settings.
objectiveThe study aimed to assess the accuracy, consistency, and feasibility of GPT-4-based ChatGPT models (GPT-4o and GPT-4-Turbo) for patient triage using the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and evaluate GPT-4o's ability to provide accurate outpatient department guidance based on simulated patient scenarios.
methodsA 2-phase experimental study was conducted. In the first phase, 2 ChatGPT models (GPT-4o and GPT-4-Turbo) were evaluated for MEWS-based patient triage accuracy using 1854 simulated patient scenarios. Accuracy and consistency were assessed before and after prompt engineering. In the second phase, GPT-4o was tested for outpatient department selection accuracy using 264 scenarios sourced from the Chinese Medical Case Repository. Each scenario was independently evaluated by GPT-4o thrice. Data analyses included Wilcoxon tests, Kendall correlation coefficients, and logistic regression analyses.
resultsIn the first phase, ChatGPT's triage accuracy, based on MEWS, improved following prompt engineering. Interestingly, GPT-4-Turbo outperformed GPT-4o. GPT-4-Turbo achieved an accuracy of 100% compared to GPT-4o's accuracy of 96.2%, despite GPT-4o initially showing better performance prior to prompt engineering. This finding suggests that GPT-4-Turbo may be more adaptable to prompt optimization. In the second phase, GPT-4o, with superior performance on emotional responsiveness compared to GPT-4-Turbo, demonstrated an overall guidance accuracy of 92.63% (95% CI 90.34%-94.93%), with the highest accuracy in internal medicine (93.51%, 95% CI 90.85%-96.17%) and the lowest in general surgery (91.46%, 95% CI 86.50%-96.43%).
conclusionsChatGPT demonstrated promising capability for supporting patient triage and outpatient guidance in EDs. GPT-4-Turbo showed greater adaptability to prompt engineering, whereas GPT-4o exhibited superior responsiveness and emotional interaction, which are essential for patient-facing tasks. Future studies should explore real-world implementation and address the identified limitations to enhance ChatGPT's clinical integration.
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.