ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2026
Artificial intelligence-driven triage in emergency departments: a comparative study of machine learning approaches.
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn emergency departments, accurate and timely triage plays a critical role in prioritizing patient care. Traditional triage often suffers from subjectivity and inconsistency, especially under time pressure and overcrowded conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive potential of multiple supervised machine learning models for three-class emergency department triage classification and compare their performance using routinely available triage variables.
methodsWe conducted a comparative analysis of eight supervised machine learning models using a retrospective dataset comprising 510 patient records from the emergency department triage. The dataset included demographic features, vital signs, and chief complaints. A 10-fold cross-validation strategy was employed to evaluate performance in a three-class triage outcome scenario based on urgency levels using accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score.
resultsAmong the evaluated models, logistic regression, random forest, support vector machine, and majority voting achieved the highest predictive performance, with overall accuracies exceeding 89%. The confusion matrix analysis revealed that low-urgency cases were consistently classified with the highest accuracy across all models, while misclassifications occurred primarily between high-urgency and medium-urgency cases.
conclusionThe results show that machine learning models appear well-suited to support the emergency departments triage decision-making process. Integrating such models into emergency departments workflows can improve patient prioritization, streamline clinical operations, and ultimately contribute to better quality of care.
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.