ArticlePloS one2026
Performance and safety of a fine-tuned small language model for pediatric emergency triage: A benchmark study.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pediatric emergency triage is a safety-critical task, and recent studies have explored whether artificial intelligence, including language models, can support triage decision-making; however, evidence on fine-tuned open-weight language models remains limited. We conducted a retrospective benchmark study using de-identified triage records from a tertiary pediatric emergency department in Korea collected from January 2020 to April 2025. After exclusions, 74,170 encounters were included. Each encounter was reconstructed into a case-level text sequence from triage-time structured variables and nurse-authored narratives. Qwen3-8B-Base was fine-tuned with Low-Rank Adaptation and Group Relative Policy Optimization using a safety-oriented reward design and was compared with a structured-data XGBoost model on a common evaluable test subset of 14,832 encounters. The fine-tuned model achieved an accuracy of 58.60%, a macro-F1 score of 0.417, and a quadratic weighted kappa of 0.535. Within-one-level agreement was 97.13%, and strict under-triage, defined as true Korean Triage and Acuity Scale levels 1 or 2 predicted as levels 4 or 5, occurred in 0.65% of cases. The structured-data comparator showed higher overall performance, with an accuracy of 69.40%, a macro-F1 score of 0.618, and a quadratic weighted kappa of 0.651. However, the fine-tuned model showed fewer extreme errors and lower strict under-triage in selected high-acuity groups, at the cost of higher over-triage. In this real-world pediatric benchmark, the fine-tuned language model did not surpass the structured-data comparator in overall performance but showed a distinct safety-oriented error profile. These findings support its potential role as a decision-support aid for human triage review rather than an autonomous triage system. External and prospective validation will be necessary before clinical implementation.
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.