ABSTRACT
Background Large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, are increasingly integrated into healthcare to support clinicians in making informed decisions. Given ChatGPT’s potential, it is necessary to explore such applications as a support tool, particularly within mental health telephone triage services. This study evaluates whether GPT-4 models can accurately triage psychiatric emergency vignettes and compares its performance to clinicians.
Methods A cross-sectional study with qualitative analysis was conducted. Two clinical psychologists developed 22 psychiatric emergency vignettes. Responses were generated by three versions of GPT-4 (GPT-4o, GPT-4o Mini, GPT-4 Legacy) using ChatGPT, and two independent nurse practitioners (clinicians). The responses focused on three triage criteria: risk (Low 1-3 High), admission (Yes-1; No-2), and urgency (Low 1-3 High).
Results Substantial interrater reliability was observed between clinicians and GPT-4 responses across the three triage criteria (Cohen’s Kappa: Admission = 0.77; Risk = 0.78; Urgency = 0.76). Among the GPT-4 models, Kappa values indicated moderate to substantial agreement (Fleiss’ Kappa: Admission = 0.69, Risk = 0.63, Urgency = 0.72). The mean scores for triage criteria responses between GPT-4 models and clinicians exhibited consistent patterns with minimal variability. Admission responses had a mean score of 1.73 (SD = 0.45), risk scores had a mean of 2.12 (SD= 0.83), and urgency scores averaged 2.27 (SD = 0.44).
Conclusion This study suggests that GPT-4 models could be leveraged as a support tool in mental health telephone triage, particularly for psychiatric emergencies. While findings are promising, further research is required to confirm clinical relevance.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study used simulated data that were openly available to the public before the initiation of the study
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos