MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115592294 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17936263

MEDICAL TRIAGE SYSTEMS BASIC APPLICATION PRINCIPLES AND GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

2025· article· en· W7115592294 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriagePrioritizationIdentification (biology)Process (computing)Perspective (graphical)Health careCritically ill

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medical triage is the process of classifying patients according to their clinical priorities to maximize the efficient use of limited resources in emergency healthcare. Historically, it originated in the Napoleonic Wars and is now widely used in modern emergency services, disaster management, pandemics, and wartime situations. The primary objectives of triage are the efficient use of resources, ensuring patient safety, and ensuring the continuity of healthcare services. Triage systems are used worldwide (color-coded systems, ESI, START, CTAS), the fundamental approach remains the same: rapid identification of critically ill patients and appropriate intervention. While the START triage system is generally used in Turkey, five-step systems are preferred in hospital emergency departments in countries such as the US, Canada, and the UK. The effectiveness of triage depends on the practitioner's knowledge, experience, and ethical awareness; misclassifications can increase mortality or waste resources. With the COVID-19 pandemic, digitally supported triage systems have become a hot topic, and teletriage and automated prioritization applications have reduced hospital admission burdens. In the future, the success of triage will be strengthened by international standardization, ethics-based training, artificial intelligence-supported decision-making systems, and data security principles, contributing to both efficiency and equity in healthcare.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207