Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40890624›Full record

Observational studyBMC emergency medicine2025

Performance of ChatGPT, Gemini and DeepSeek for non-critical triage support using real-world conversations in emergency department.

Sukyo Lee, Sumin Jung, Jong-Hak Park, Hanjin Cho, Sungwoo Moon, Sejoong Ahn

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
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.

Sukyo Lee *Department of Emergency Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan-si, 15355, Republic of Korea.
Sumin Jung *Core Research & Development Center, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan-si, 15355, Republic of Korea.
Jong-Hak ParkDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan-si, 15355, Republic of Korea.
Hanjin ChoDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan-si, 15355, Republic of Korea.
Sungwoo MoonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan-si, 15355, Republic of Korea.
Sejoong AhnDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan-si, 15355, Republic of Korea. sejoongahn@naver.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTimely and accurate triage is crucial for the emergency department (ED) care. Recently, there has been growing interest in applying large language models (LLMs) to support triage decision-making. However, most existing studies have evaluated these models using simulated scenarios rather than real-world clinical cases. Therefore, we evaluated the performance of multiple commercial LLMs for non-critical triage support in ED using real-world clinical conversations.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed real-world triage conversations prospectively collected from three tertiary hospitals in South Korea. Multiple commercial LLMs-including OpenAI GPT-4o, GPT-4.1, O3, Google Gemini 2.0 flash, Gemini 2.5 flash, Gemini 2.5 pro, DeepSeek V3, and DeepSeek R1-were evaluated for the accuracy in triaging patient urgency based solely on unsummarized dialogue. The Korean Triage and Acuity Scale (KTAS) assigned by triage nurses was used as the gold standard for evaluating the LLM classifications. Model performance was assessed under both a zero-shot prompting condition and a few-shot prompting condition that included representative examples.

resultsA total of 1,057 triage cases were included in the analysis. Among the models, Gemini 2.5 flash achieved the highest accuracy (73.8%), specificity (88.9%), and PPV (94.0%). Gemini 2.5 pro demonstrated the highest sensitivity (90.9%) and F1-score (82.4%), though with lower specificity (23.3%). GPT-4.1 also showed balanced high accuracy (70.6%) and sensitivity (81.3%) with practical response times (1.79s). Performance varied widely between models and even between different versions from the same vendor. With few-shot prompting, most models showed further improvements in accuracy and F1-score.

conclusionsLLMs can accurately triage ED patient urgency using real-world clinical conversations. Several models demonstrated both high sensitivity and acceptable response times, supporting the feasibility of LLM in non-critical triage support tools in diverse clinical environments. These findings apply to non-critical patients (KTAS 3-5), and further research should address integration with objective clinical data and real-time workflow.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingEmergency Service, HospitalGenerative Artificial IntelligenceLarge Language ModelsTriageAdultAgedCommunicationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRepublic of KoreaRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityArtificial intelligenceClinical conversationKorean triage and acuity scaleLarge language modelTriage

Identifiers

PMID40890624
PMCPMC12403343

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.