Back

A Data-Driven Framework for Generating Population-Linked Case Vignettes from Nationwide Triage Data

Seidel, A.; Steiger, E.; Schuster, J.; Kroll, L. E.

2026-06-10 health informatics
10.64898/2026.06.08.26354886 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Digital decision-support tools such as triage systems and symptom checkers support millions of health-related decisions each year. Their quality and safety are commonly evaluated using textual patient cases, known as case vignettes. However, existing vignette sets written by medical experts cover only a limited spectrum of real-world patient presentations and lack population weights, which would allow extrapolating evaluation results to the underlying patient population. Objective: This study aims to develop a data-driven framework for automatically generating a human-manageable set of case vignettes from nationwide triage data that captures broad presentation diversity and links each vignette to a quantitative weight reflecting the number of underlying patient assessments. Methods: From 3.2 million triage assessments conducted over one year using structured triage software in the German medical on-call service (telephone triage and online self-triage) and at the joint contact points of the outpatient emergency care service and hospital emergency departments, we randomly sampled 50,000 cases. Triage questionnaires were converted into semantic embeddings using a German Sentence Transformer Model and grouped by agglomerative clustering. For clusters containing sufficient assessments, we generated one representative assessment using a two-phase simulated-annealing optimization. The optimization minimized the distance to the cluster centroid while maximizing the number of answered triage questions, aiming for high representativeness and information content. Each representative assessment was assigned the size of its source cluster as its sample-based weight. A similarity-based sensitivity analysis was performed to examine whether these weights were preserved in the full 1-year population. Finally, the question-answer pairs of the representative assessments were converted into structured textual case vignettes using controlled prompting of a large language model. Results: The cluster analysis yielded 514 included clusters covering 96.8% of the sampled 50,000 assessments. The generated representatives showed strong agreement with the majority treatment-urgency recommendation of their source cluster (Spearman's {rho}=0.78, p<0.001) and contained on average 4.3 more answered triage questions than the original assessments within their clusters. When weighted by cluster size, the representatives approximated the sample distributions of treatment urgency, demographics, and symptoms, although some systematic deviations remained, most notably an overrepresentation of female cases (+13.5%), patients aged 14-49 years (+8.0%), and the urgency category "As soon as possible" (+6.6%). Of 121 recorded symptoms, 101 (83.5%) were covered by the representatives; the rest each occurred in <0.5% of the sample. In a sensitivity analysis, cluster-based vignette weights were strongly correlated with similarity-based population weights (Spearman's {rho}=0.77, p<0.001), and 90.1% of assessments in the full 1-year population were matched to at least one vignette. Conclusions: We present a data-driven framework for deriving a manageable set of population-weighted case vignettes from nationwide triage data. The resulting vignettes captured broad presentation diversity, approximated key sample characteristics, and provided an explicit quantitative link to the number of underlying patient assessments. After medical expert review and refinement, the vignettes may support more population-aware evaluation and quality assurance of digital decision-support tools.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
33.6%
2
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
12.6%
3
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
4
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.4%
5
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.0%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 33%
3.7%
7
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.7%
8
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.5%
9
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
10
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.9%
11
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
34 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.8%
12
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
13
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
14
International Journal of Medical Informatics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
15
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.4%
16
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
17
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 61%
1.1%
18
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 26%
0.9%
19
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
20
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.8%
21
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
22
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
23
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 64%
0.7%
25
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
26
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
27
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
18 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%