Suppr超能文献

转化急诊分诊:基于情景的初步横断面研究比较人工智能模型和临床专业知识以提高准确性。

Transforming emergency triage: A preliminary, scenario-based cross-sectional study comparing artificial intelligence models and clinical expertise for enhanced accuracy.

出版信息

Bratisl Lek Listy. 2024;125(11):738-743. doi: 10.4149/BLL_2024_114.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study examines triage judgments in emergency settings and compares the outcomes of artificial intelligence models for healthcare professionals. It discusses the disparities in precision rates between subjective evaluations by health professionals with objective assessments of AI systems.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

For the analysis of the efficacy of emergency triage; 50 virtual patient scenarios had been created. Emergency medicine residents and other healthcare providers who had triage education were tasked with categorizing triage levels for virtual patient scenarios. Also artificial intelligence systems, tasked for resolving the same scenarios. All of them were asked to use three color-coded triage of the Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health. The answer keys were created by consensus of the researchers. In addition, Emergency medicine specialists were asked to evaluate the acuity level of each scenario in order to perform sub-analyses.

RESULTS

The study consisted of 86 healthcare professionals, comprising 31 Emergency medicine residents (26.5%), 1 paramedic (0.9%), 5 emergency health technicians (4.3%), and 80 nurses (68.4%). Google Bard AI and OpenAI Chat GPT v.3.5 were used as artificial intelligence systems. The responses compared with the answer key to determine each groups efficacy. As planned the responses from healthcare professionals were analyzed individually for acuity level of scenarios. Emergency medicine residents and other groups of healthcare providers had significantly higher numbers of correct answers compared to Google Bard and Chat GPT (n=30.7 vs n=25.5). There was no significant difference between ChatGPT and Bard for low and high acuity scenarios (p=0.821)CONCLUSION: AI models can examine extensive data sets and make more accurate and quicker triage judgments with sophisticated algorithms. However, in this study, we found that the triage ability of artificial intelligence is not as sufficient as humans. A more efficient triage system can be developed by integrating artificial intelligence with human input, rather than solely relying on technology (Tab. 4, Ref. 41). Text in PDF www.elis.sk Keywords: emergency triage, AI applications, health technology, artificial intelligence, emergency management.

摘要

简介

本研究考察了紧急情况下的分诊判断,并比较了医疗保健专业人员使用的人工智能模型的结果。它讨论了健康专业人员的主观评估与人工智能系统的客观评估之间在精度率上的差异。

材料和方法

为了分析紧急分诊的效果;创建了 50 个虚拟患者场景。接受过分诊教育的急诊医学住院医师和其他医疗保健提供者被要求对虚拟患者场景进行分诊级别分类。人工智能系统也被要求解决相同的场景。他们都被要求使用土耳其卫生部的三种颜色编码分诊。答案由研究人员达成共识创建。此外,还要求急诊医学专家评估每个场景的 acuity 水平,以便进行子分析。

结果

该研究包括 86 名医疗保健专业人员,其中包括 31 名急诊医学住院医师(26.5%)、1 名护理人员(0.9%)、5 名紧急医疗技术员(4.3%)和 80 名护士(68.4%)。Google Bard AI 和 OpenAI Chat GPT v.3.5 被用作人工智能系统。将响应与答案进行比较以确定每个组的效果。按照计划,单独分析了医疗保健专业人员对场景 acuity 水平的响应。急诊医学住院医师和其他医疗保健提供者组的正确答案数量明显高于 Google Bard 和 Chat GPT(n=30.7 对 n=25.5)。在低 acuity 和高 acuity 场景中,ChatGPT 和 Bard 之间没有显著差异(p=0.821)。

结论

人工智能模型可以检查广泛的数据集,并使用复杂的算法进行更准确和更快的分诊判断。然而,在这项研究中,我们发现人工智能的分诊能力不如人类。通过将人工智能与人工输入相结合,而不是仅依赖技术,可以开发更有效的分诊系统(表 4,参考文献 41)。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验