Diagnostic Performance of ChatGPT to perform emergency department triage: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Kaboudi, N.; Firouzbakht, S.; Shahir Eftekhar, M.; Fayazbakhsh, F.; Joharivarnoosfaderani, N.; Ghaderi, S.; Dehdashti, M.; Mohtasham Kia, Y.; Afshari, M.; Vasaghi-Gharamaleki, M.; Haghani, L.; Khalaj, F.; Mohammadi, Z.; Hasanabadi, Z.; Shahidi, R.
Show abstract
BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI), particularly ChatGPT developed by OpenAI, has shown potential in improving diagnostic accuracy and efficiency in emergency department (ED) triage. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance and safety of ChatGPT in prioritizing patients based on urgency in ED settings. MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Comprehensive literature searches were performed in Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase. Studies evaluating ChatGPTs diagnostic performance in ED triage were included. Quality assessment was conducted using the QUADAS-2 tool. Pooled accuracy estimates were calculated using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed with the I{superscript 2} statistic. ResultsFourteen studies with a total of 1,412 patients or scenarios were included. ChatGPT 4.0 demonstrated a pooled accuracy of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.64-0.98) with substantial heterogeneity (I{superscript 2} = 93%). ChatGPT 3.5 showed a pooled accuracy of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.43-0.81) with significant heterogeneity (I{superscript 2} = 84%). Funnel plots indicated potential publication bias, particularly for ChatGPT 3.5. Quality assessments revealed varying levels of risk of bias and applicability concerns. ConclusionChatGPT, especially version 4.0, shows promise in improving ED triage accuracy. However, significant variability and potential biases highlight the need for further evaluation and enhancement.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A comparison of self-triage tools to nurse driven triage in the emergency department 96%
- Triaging and Referring In Adjacent General and Emergency Departments (the TRIAGE trial): a cluster randomised controlled trial 95%
- Derivation and validation of a triage tool for acutely ill adults with suspected COVID-19: The PRIEST observational cohort study 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Accuracy of the National Early Warning Score version 2 (NEWS2) in predicting need for time-critical treatment: Retrospective observational cohort study 95%
- Variation in ambulance pre-alert process and practice: Cross-sectional survey of ambulance clinicians 94%
- Emergency medicine patient wait time multivariable prediction models: a multicentre derivation and validation study 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Severe bandemia is not associated with increased risk for adverse events in general pediatric emergency department patients 92%
- Post mortem pathological findings in COVID-19 cases: A Systematic Review 92%
- Comparison of Efficacy of Dexamethasone and Methylprednisolone in Improving the Partial Pressure of Arterial Oxygen and Fraction of Inspired Oxygen Ratio among COVID-19 Patients 92%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Towards definitions of critical illness and critical care using concept analysis 95%
- Validating the RISE UP score for predicting prognosis in patients with COVID-19 in the emergency department, a retrospective study 94%
- Personal protective equipment for reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection among healthcare workers involved in emergency trauma surgery during the pandemic: a systematic review protocol 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.