Evidence Hub

Accuracy of the large language model ChatGPT in adult emergency department triage: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Gao S, Yu M, Zheng Y, Zhang M, Yang Z, Zhang J

BMC emergency medicine, 2026

1 citation

Abstract

AIM: This study employs a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy and sensitivity (i.e., correct identification rate of high-risk patients at levels 1–2) of ChatGPT in adult emergency triage and to compare the potential of its different versions. METHODS: A systematic search of English and Chinese medical databases (2022–2025) was performed to identify studies directly comparing the triage performance of ChatGPT with that of human experts or a gold standard. The included studies comprised both simulated case scenarios and real-world clinical data from emergency departments. Literature screening adhered to the PICO framework. Methodological quality was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 tool. Data on overall accuracy and sensitivity were extracted. Meta-analysis was conducted in RevMan 5.4, with a predefined subgroup analysis based on the ChatGPT version. RESULTS: A total of 15 studies were included. The pooled accuracy was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.48–0.55) for ChatGPT-3.5, 0.70 (95% CI: 0.58–0.81) for ChatGPT-4 and its variants, and 0.81 for the optimized versions of ChatGPT (with the 95% confidence interval upper bound approaching 1.0 due to high heterogeneity). No significant differences were observed between ChatGPT and human triage in overall accuracy or sensitivity overall. Subgroup analyses showed that ChatGPT-3.5 performed similarly to humans on both metrics. In contrast, ChatGPT-4 and its variants demonstrated higher accuracy (RR = 1.04, P < 0.001) and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free