MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7127660827 · doi:10.24451/arbor.12943

AI-Enhanced Speech Recognition in Triage

2025· article· en· W7127660827 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ahmed Elhilali, Vanessa Brügger, Isabelle Tschannen, Wolf E. Hautz, Gert Krummrey

Bibliographic record

VenueBFH: ARBOR · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriageDocumentationConsistency (knowledge bases)GermanProcess (computing)Workaround

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Triage is used in emergency departments to ensure timely patient care according to urgency of treatment. However, triage accuracy and efficiency remain challenging due to time-constraints and high demand. This proof-of-concept study evaluates an AI-powered triage system that leverages speech recognition (STT) and large language models (LLMs) to process patient interactions in triage and to assign an Emergency Severity Index (ESI) triage level and a classification of the main presenting complaint according to the Canadian Emergency Department Information System (CEDIS). In Switzerland, different Swiss German dialects add to the complexity of the task. STT models achieved word error rates (WER) of 2.3% for High German and 17.66% for Swiss German. Despite the high WER, the AI's classification accuracy reached 90-100% for ESI levels and CEDIS codes. These results highlight the potential of integrating AI into triage workflows, enhancing consistency and reducing the documentation burden for clinical staff. Future research should address multi-language adaptation and data security to ensure seamless implementation in real-world settings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.304 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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 venueBFH: ARBORSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207