ArticleScientific reports2025
Artificial intelligence for severity triage based on conversations in an emergency department in Korea.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Large Language Models for Optimizing Patient Recruitment Decisions in Voice Data Generation Projects.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence and robotic surgery in emergency gastrointestinal procedures: a review of current evidence and future directions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the fast-paced emergency departments, where crises unfold unpredictably, the systematic prioritization of critical patients based on a severity classification is vital for swift and effective treatment. This study aimed to enhance the quality of emergency services by automatically categorizing the severity levels of incoming patients using AI-powered natural language processing (NLP) algorithms to analyze conversations between medical staff and patients. The dataset comprised 1,028 transcripts of bedside conversations within emergency rooms. To verify the robustness of the models, we performed tenfold cross-validation. Based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) values, the support vector machine achieved the best performance among the term frequency-inverse document frequency-based conventional machine learning models with an AUROC of 0.764 (95% CI 0.019). Among the neural network models, multilayer perceptron performed with an AUROC of 0.759 (± 0.024). This research explored methods for automatically classifying patient severity using real-world conversations, including those with nonsensical and confused content. To achieve this, artificial intelligence algorithms that consider the frequency and order of words used in the conversation were employed alongside neural network models. Our findings have the potential to significantly contribute to alleviating overcrowding in emergency departments of hospitals, with future extensions involving highly efficient large language models. The results suggest that a fluid and immediate response to urgent situations, a reduction in patient waiting time, and effectively addressing the special circumstances of the emergency room environment can be achieved using this approach.
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.