The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Enhancing Diagnostic and Triage Accuracy in Hospital Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review.

Q2 Medicine
Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran Pub Date : 2026-05-30 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.47176/mjiri.40.55
Mehdi Shakoori, Fatemeh Esmaili, Ezzat Abbariki, Esmail Heidaranlu
{"title":"The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Enhancing Diagnostic and Triage Accuracy in Hospital Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Mehdi Shakoori, Fatemeh Esmaili, Ezzat Abbariki, Esmail Heidaranlu","doi":"10.47176/mjiri.40.55","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Emergency departments face challenges of overcrowding and human error. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of artificial intelligence (AI) in improving triage and diagnostic accuracy in emergency settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar until September 2025. Inclusion criteria comprised original studies reporting at least one quantitative performance metric. Study quality was assessed using NOS and QUADAS-2. Data were synthesized narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>AI models outperformed traditional triage systems (AUC often >0.90). In clinical interpretation of AUC, its limitations in imbalanced datasets should be considered, and metrics such as PPV, NPV, and AUPRC should also be reported. For instance, despite an acceptable AUC, ChatGPT 4.0 led to significant over-triage due to low specificity (18.2%). However, risks of algorithmic bias and challenges of integrating AI with real-world clinical workflows remain major implementation barriers. User resistance and the need for continuous ethical oversight were also identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>AI holds potential to improve emergency triage, but current evidence is largely based on retrospective single-center studies. Clinical implementation should be gradual, starting in high-risk domains (e.g., sepsis screening), and supported by continuous ethical oversight.</p>","PeriodicalId":18361,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran","volume":"40 ","pages":"55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13659705/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47176/mjiri.40.55","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Emergency departments face challenges of overcrowding and human error. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of artificial intelligence (AI) in improving triage and diagnostic accuracy in emergency settings.

Methods: This systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar until September 2025. Inclusion criteria comprised original studies reporting at least one quantitative performance metric. Study quality was assessed using NOS and QUADAS-2. Data were synthesized narratively.

Results: AI models outperformed traditional triage systems (AUC often >0.90). In clinical interpretation of AUC, its limitations in imbalanced datasets should be considered, and metrics such as PPV, NPV, and AUPRC should also be reported. For instance, despite an acceptable AUC, ChatGPT 4.0 led to significant over-triage due to low specificity (18.2%). However, risks of algorithmic bias and challenges of integrating AI with real-world clinical workflows remain major implementation barriers. User resistance and the need for continuous ethical oversight were also identified.

Conclusion: AI holds potential to improve emergency triage, but current evidence is largely based on retrospective single-center studies. Clinical implementation should be gradual, starting in high-risk domains (e.g., sepsis screening), and supported by continuous ethical oversight.

人工智能在提高医院急诊科诊断和分诊准确性中的作用:系统综述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
90
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书