Context-Aware Emergency Department Triage Using Pairwise Comparisons and Bradley-Terry Aggregation
Jarrett, P.; Reeder, J.; McDonald, S.; Diercks, D.; Jamieson, A. R.
Show abstract
STRUCTURED ABSTRACTO_ST_ABSObjectiveC_ST_ABSTo evaluate a ranking approach for emergency department (ED) waiting room prioritization that uses pairwise clinical comparisons aggregated via a Bradley-Terry model, and to assess its cross-site stability without site-specific training. Materials and MethodsUsing the Multimodal Clinical Monitoring in the Emergency Department (MC-MED) dataset (118,385 ED visits, Site A), we defined a composite deterioration outcome (intensive care unit [ICU] admission, intubation, vasopressor, ventilation, or death within 6 hours) and evaluated 7 queue-ordering policies across 1,000 simulated shifts. The primary endpoint was Recall@5 for deteriorators; secondary endpoints included area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and simulated time-to-provider (TTP) metrics. External validation used MIMIC-IV-ED (425,087 visits, Site B) with 500 shifts. Methods reported per TRIPOD-LLM. ResultsOn MC-MED, BT-LLM-Enriched (Bradley-Terry ranking with a large language model [LLM] judge, GPT-4.1, using full diagnoses and medications) exceeded the Emergency Severity Index (ESI) on the primary endpoint: Recall@5 0.587 vs. 0.491 (p<0.001). XGBoost achieved Recall@5 0.648 but required large site-specific labeled training data. On external validation, supervised model performance attenuated (XGBoost AUROC 0.892 to 0.807) while BT-LLM-Enriched remained stable (0.826 to 0.831); the two were statistically indistinguishable on external data. DiscussionUnder external validation, supervised model performance attenuated while zero-shot LLM ranking remained stable, suggesting cross-site stability without requiring site-specific training data. ConclusionPairwise ranking with an LLM judge significantly outperforms ESI-based ordering and remains stable across sites without local training, matching supervised models on external data.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluating large language model workflows in clinical decision support: referral, triage, and diagnosis 96%
- Machine Learning for Real-Time Aggregated Prediction of Hospital Admission for Emergency Patients 95%
- Continuous-Time and Dynamic Suicide Attempt Risk Prediction with Neural Ordinary Differential Equations 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of Domain Generalization and Adaptation on Improving Model Robustness to Temporal Dataset Shift in Clinical Medicine 95%
- Using explainable machine learning to identify patients at risk of reattendance at discharge from emergency departments 95%
- EHR Foundation Models Improve Robustness in the Presence of Temporal Distribution Shift 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical Utility of Automatable Prediction Models for Improving Palliative and End-Of-Life Care Outcomes: Towards Routine Decision Analysis Before Implementation 95%
- Real-Time Electronic Health Record Mortality Prediction During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Cohort Study 94%
- Validation of a Derived International Patient Severity Algorithm to Support COVID-19 Analytics from Electronic Health Record Data 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Optimizing the Implementation of Clinical Predictive Models to Minimize National Costs: A Sepsis Case Study 94%
- Optimal policy determination in sequential systemic and locoregional therapy of oropharyngeal squamous carcinomas: A patient-physician digital twin dyad with deep Q-learning for treatment selection 93%
- Distinguishing Admissions Specifically for COVID-19 from Incidental SARS-CoV-2 Admissions: A National Retrospective EHR Study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
"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.