Cargando…
Benchmarking Triage Capability of Symptom Checkers Against That of Medical Laypersons: Survey Study
BACKGROUND: Symptom checkers (SCs) are tools developed to provide clinical decision support to laypersons. Apart from suggesting probable diagnoses, they commonly advise when users should seek care (triage advice). SCs have become increasingly popular despite prior studies rating their performance a...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
JMIR Publications
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7991983/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33688845 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/24475 |
_version_ | 1783669285813485568 |
---|---|
author | Schmieding, Malte L Mörgeli, Rudolf Schmieding, Maike A L Feufel, Markus A Balzer, Felix |
author_facet | Schmieding, Malte L Mörgeli, Rudolf Schmieding, Maike A L Feufel, Markus A Balzer, Felix |
author_sort | Schmieding, Malte L |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Symptom checkers (SCs) are tools developed to provide clinical decision support to laypersons. Apart from suggesting probable diagnoses, they commonly advise when users should seek care (triage advice). SCs have become increasingly popular despite prior studies rating their performance as mediocre. To date, it is unclear whether SCs can triage better than those who might choose to use them. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare triage accuracy between SCs and their potential users (ie, laypersons). METHODS: On Amazon Mechanical Turk, we recruited 91 adults from the United States who had no professional medical background. In a web-based survey, the participants evaluated 45 fictitious clinical case vignettes. Data for 15 SCs that had processed the same vignettes were obtained from a previous study. As main outcome measures, we assessed the accuracy of the triage assessments made by participants and SCs for each of the three triage levels (ie, emergency care, nonemergency care, self-care) and overall, the proportion of participants outperforming each SC in terms of accuracy, and the risk aversion of participants and SCs by comparing the proportion of cases that were overtriaged. RESULTS: The mean overall triage accuracy was similar for participants (60.9%, SD 6.8%; 95% CI 59.5%-62.3%) and SCs (58%, SD 12.8%). Most participants outperformed all but 5 SCs. On average, SCs more reliably detected emergencies (80.6%, SD 17.9%) than laypersons did (67.5%, SD 16.4%; 95% CI 64.1%-70.8%). Although both SCs and participants struggled with cases requiring self-care (the least urgent triage category), SCs more often wrongly classified these cases as emergencies (43/174, 24.7%) compared with laypersons (56/1365, 4.10%). CONCLUSIONS: Most SCs had no greater triage capability than an average layperson, although the triage accuracy of the five best SCs was superior to the accuracy of most participants. SCs might improve early detection of emergencies but might also needlessly increase resource utilization in health care. Laypersons sometimes require support in deciding when to rely on self-care but it is in that very situation where SCs perform the worst. Further research is needed to determine how to best combine the strengths of humans and SCs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7991983 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | JMIR Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79919832021-04-01 Benchmarking Triage Capability of Symptom Checkers Against That of Medical Laypersons: Survey Study Schmieding, Malte L Mörgeli, Rudolf Schmieding, Maike A L Feufel, Markus A Balzer, Felix J Med Internet Res Original Paper BACKGROUND: Symptom checkers (SCs) are tools developed to provide clinical decision support to laypersons. Apart from suggesting probable diagnoses, they commonly advise when users should seek care (triage advice). SCs have become increasingly popular despite prior studies rating their performance as mediocre. To date, it is unclear whether SCs can triage better than those who might choose to use them. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare triage accuracy between SCs and their potential users (ie, laypersons). METHODS: On Amazon Mechanical Turk, we recruited 91 adults from the United States who had no professional medical background. In a web-based survey, the participants evaluated 45 fictitious clinical case vignettes. Data for 15 SCs that had processed the same vignettes were obtained from a previous study. As main outcome measures, we assessed the accuracy of the triage assessments made by participants and SCs for each of the three triage levels (ie, emergency care, nonemergency care, self-care) and overall, the proportion of participants outperforming each SC in terms of accuracy, and the risk aversion of participants and SCs by comparing the proportion of cases that were overtriaged. RESULTS: The mean overall triage accuracy was similar for participants (60.9%, SD 6.8%; 95% CI 59.5%-62.3%) and SCs (58%, SD 12.8%). Most participants outperformed all but 5 SCs. On average, SCs more reliably detected emergencies (80.6%, SD 17.9%) than laypersons did (67.5%, SD 16.4%; 95% CI 64.1%-70.8%). Although both SCs and participants struggled with cases requiring self-care (the least urgent triage category), SCs more often wrongly classified these cases as emergencies (43/174, 24.7%) compared with laypersons (56/1365, 4.10%). CONCLUSIONS: Most SCs had no greater triage capability than an average layperson, although the triage accuracy of the five best SCs was superior to the accuracy of most participants. SCs might improve early detection of emergencies but might also needlessly increase resource utilization in health care. Laypersons sometimes require support in deciding when to rely on self-care but it is in that very situation where SCs perform the worst. Further research is needed to determine how to best combine the strengths of humans and SCs. JMIR Publications 2021-03-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7991983/ /pubmed/33688845 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/24475 Text en ©Malte L Schmieding, Rudolf Mörgeli, Maike A L Schmieding, Markus A Feufel, Felix Balzer. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 10.03.2021. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Schmieding, Malte L Mörgeli, Rudolf Schmieding, Maike A L Feufel, Markus A Balzer, Felix Benchmarking Triage Capability of Symptom Checkers Against That of Medical Laypersons: Survey Study |
title | Benchmarking Triage Capability of Symptom Checkers Against That of Medical Laypersons: Survey Study |
title_full | Benchmarking Triage Capability of Symptom Checkers Against That of Medical Laypersons: Survey Study |
title_fullStr | Benchmarking Triage Capability of Symptom Checkers Against That of Medical Laypersons: Survey Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Benchmarking Triage Capability of Symptom Checkers Against That of Medical Laypersons: Survey Study |
title_short | Benchmarking Triage Capability of Symptom Checkers Against That of Medical Laypersons: Survey Study |
title_sort | benchmarking triage capability of symptom checkers against that of medical laypersons: survey study |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7991983/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33688845 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/24475 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schmiedingmaltel benchmarkingtriagecapabilityofsymptomcheckersagainstthatofmedicallaypersonssurveystudy AT morgelirudolf benchmarkingtriagecapabilityofsymptomcheckersagainstthatofmedicallaypersonssurveystudy AT schmiedingmaikeal benchmarkingtriagecapabilityofsymptomcheckersagainstthatofmedicallaypersonssurveystudy AT feufelmarkusa benchmarkingtriagecapabilityofsymptomcheckersagainstthatofmedicallaypersonssurveystudy AT balzerfelix benchmarkingtriagecapabilityofsymptomcheckersagainstthatofmedicallaypersonssurveystudy |