Locally Deployable Small Language Models for Emergency Department Decision Support: A Systematic Benchmark of Fine-Tuning Strategies

Accurate and consistent Emergency Severity Index (ESI) assignment remains a persistent challenge in emergency departments, where highly variable free-text triage documentation contributes to mistriage and workflow inefficiencies. This study evaluates whether open-source small language models (SLMs) can serve as reliable, privacy-preserving decision-support tools for clinical triage. We systematically compared multiple SLMs across diverse prompting pipelines and found that clinical vignettes, concise summaries of triage narratives, yielded the most accurate predictions. The SLM, Qwen2.5-7B, demonstrated the strongest balance of accuracy, stability, and computational efficiency. Through large-scale domain adaptation using expert-curated and silver-standard pediatric triage data, fine-tuned Qwen2.5-7B models substantially reduced discordance and clinically significant errors, outperforming all baseline SLMs and advanced proprietary large language models (LLMs, e.g., GPT-4o). These findings highlight the feasibility of institution-specific SLMs for reliable, privacy-preserving ESI decision support and underscore the importance of targeted fine-tuning over more complex inference strategies.

We present LLM4SDM, the first study of open-source smaller language models (OS-sLLMs) for automated assessment of shared decision making (SDM) using the Observer OPTION12 framework. Unlike previous work that relies on large commercial models and the shorter OPTION5 instrument, our study focuses on privacy-preserving locally deployable models and Dutch melanoma consultation transcripts. Using expert-annotated clinical consultations, we evaluate three general-domain and two medical-domain OS-sLLMs during a development-phase pilot study. Results show that general-domain models outperform medical-domain models, which exhibit substantial hallucination and instruction-following failures. Gemma3:12b achieves the strongest agreement with human annotations (Pearson r=0.51, Spearman \r{ho}=0.59). Item-level and qualitative analyses reveal systematic challenges related to temporal discourse reasoning, conversational role attribution, and evidence grounding. We further introduce a Judge-LLM consensus framework designed to support disagreement resolution among multiple models. Our findings suggest that while current OS-sLLMs cannot replace human annotators, they offer a promising foundation for privacy-preserving human-in-the-loop SDM assessment.

Online patient inquiries are often informal, incomplete, and written before professional assessment, yet they must still be routed to an appropriate level of clinical follow-up. We study this as a four-class actionable triage task -- self-care, schedule-visit, urgent-clinician-review, or emergency-referral, and ask whether prompted large language models (LLMs) can support such routing under low-resource labeling conditions. Using the public HealthCareMagic-100K corpus, we construct a 300-example human calibrated gold evaluation set, a 700-example auto-labeled silver training set, and a 40-example few-shot pool. We compare Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF) and Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers for Biomedical Text Mining (BioBERT) baselines train on silver labels against six prompted LLMs under 0-shot, 4-shot, and 12-shot conditions respectively. Accordingly, we evaluate with macro-$F_1$ alongside safety-aware metrics, including emergency-recall, under-triage rate, and severe under-triage rate. The strongest LLM (Claude Haiku 4.5, 12-shot) reaches macro-$F_1$ 0.475, exceeding the best supervised baseline (BioBERT, 0.378) on point estimate, with overlapping confidence intervals. Few-shot prompting and two-model agreement help in label-dependent ways: self-care agreement is reliable, urgent-clinician-review is not. We conclude that LLMs can support triage prioritization and selective human review, but not autonomous deployment.