We use cookies to understand how you use our site and to improve your experience. This includes personalizing content and advertising. To learn more, click here. By continuing to use our site, you accept our use of cookies. Cookie Policy.

Features Partner Sites Information LinkXpress
Sign In
Advertise with Us
PURITAN MEDICAL

Download Mobile App




Comparison Reveals Human Physicians Outperform Virtual Diagnosticians

By LabMedica International staff writers
Posted on 26 Oct 2016
Print article
Image: A study comparing diagnostic accuracy of physicians versus symptom checker apps and Internet programs suggests that reliable computer diagnostics is as yet a distant goal (Photo courtesy of Harvard University Medical School).
Image: A study comparing diagnostic accuracy of physicians versus symptom checker apps and Internet programs suggests that reliable computer diagnostics is as yet a distant goal (Photo courtesy of Harvard University Medical School).
Increasingly powerful computers using ever-more sophisticated programs are challenging human supremacy in diverse areas. Can current digital diagnostics programs outperform, or even match, human physicians? The answer, according to a new study, is still “far from it.”

The findings of the study, led by researchers at Harvard University Medical School (Boston, MA, USA), show that physicians’ performance is vastly superior as they made a correct diagnosis more than 2x as often as 23 commonly used symptom-checkers. The analysis is believed to be the first direct comparison between human-made and computer-based diagnoses.

Diagnostic errors stem from failure to recognize a disease or to do so in a timely manner. Physicians make such errors roughly 10-15% of the time, researchers say. Over the last two decades, computer-based checklists and other digital apps have been increasingly used to reduce medication errors or streamline infection-prevention protocols. Lately, experts have wondered whether computers might also help improve clinical diagnoses and reduce diagnostic errors. Many people use apps or Internet programs to check their symptoms or to self-diagnose, yet how these computerized symptom-checkers fare against physicians has not been well studied.

In the study, 234 internal medicine physicians were asked to evaluate 45 clinical cases, involving both common and uncommon conditions with varying degrees of severity. For each scenario, physicians had to identify the most likely diagnosis along with two additional possible diagnoses. Each clinical vignette was solved by at least 20 physicians.

The physicians outperformed the symptom-checker apps, listing the correct diagnosis first 72% of the time, compared with 34% of the time for the digital platforms. 84% of clinicians listed the correct diagnosis in the top 3 possibilities, compared with 51% for the digital symptom-checkers. The difference between physician and computer performance was most dramatic in more severe and less common conditions, and smaller for less acute and more common illnesses.

“While the computer programs were clearly inferior to physicians in terms of diagnostic accuracy, it will be critical to study future generations of computer programs that may be more accurate,” said senior investigator Ateev Mehrotra, associate professor of healthcare policy HMS.

Despite outperforming the machines, physicians still made errors in about 15% of cases. Developing computer-based algorithms to be used in conjunction with human decision-making may help further reduce diagnostic errors. “Clinical diagnosis is currently as much art as it is science, but there is great promise for technology to help augment clinical diagnoses,” said Prof. Mehrotra, “That is the true value proposition of these tools.”

The study, by Semigran HL et al, was published online October 10, 2016, in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine.

Related Links:
Harvard University Medical School


Platinum Member
COVID-19 Rapid Test
OSOM COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test
Specimen Collection & Transport
POCT Fluorescent Immunoassay Analyzer
FIA Go
Gold Member
ADAMTS-13 Protease Activity Test
ATS-13 Activity Assay

Print article

Channels

Clinical Chemistry

view channel
Image: Reaching speeds up to 6,000 RPM, this centrifuge forms the basis for a new type of inexpensive, POC biomedical test (Photo courtesy of Duke University)

POC Biomedical Test Spins Water Droplet Using Sound Waves for Cancer Detection

Exosomes, tiny cellular bioparticles carrying a specific set of proteins, lipids, and genetic materials, play a crucial role in cell communication and hold promise for non-invasive diagnostics.... Read more

Molecular Diagnostics

view channel
Image: The study showed the blood-based cancer screening test detects 83% of people with colorectal cancer with specificity of 90% (Photo courtesy of Guardant Health)

Blood Test Shows 83% Accuracy for Detecting Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer is the second biggest cause of cancer deaths among adults in the U.S., with forecasts suggesting 53,010 people might die from it in 2024. While fewer older adults are dying from this... Read more

Hematology

view channel
Image: The Gazelle Hb Variant Test (Photo courtesy of Hemex Health)

First Affordable and Rapid Test for Beta Thalassemia Demonstrates 99% Diagnostic Accuracy

Hemoglobin disorders rank as some of the most prevalent monogenic diseases globally. Among various hemoglobin disorders, beta thalassemia, a hereditary blood disorder, affects about 1.5% of the world's... Read more

Microbiology

view channel
Image: The new platform is designed to perform blood-based diagnoses of nontuberculosis mycobacteria (Photo courtesy of 123RF)

New Blood Test Cuts Diagnosis Time for Nontuberculous Mycobacteria Infections from Months to Hours

Breathing in nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) is a common experience for many people. These bacteria are present in water systems, soil, and dust all over the world and usually don't cause any problems.... Read more

Industry

view channel
Image: These new assays are being developed for use on the recently introduced DxI 9000 Immunoassay Analyzer (Photo courtesy of Beckman Coulter)

Beckman Coulter and Fujirebio Expand Partnership on Neurodegenerative Disease Diagnostics

Beckman Coulter Diagnostics (Brea, CA, USA) and Fujirebio Diagnostics (Tokyo, Japan) have expanded their partnership focused on the development, manufacturing and clinical adoption of neurodegenerative... Read more
Copyright © 2000-2024 Globetech Media. All rights reserved.