Cargando…

The diagnostic and triage accuracy of digital and online symptom checker tools: a systematic review

Digital and online symptom checkers are an increasingly adopted class of health technologies that enable patients to input their symptoms and biodata to produce a set of likely diagnoses and associated triage advice. However, concerns regarding the accuracy and safety of these symptom checkers have...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wallace, William, Chan, Calvin, Chidambaram, Swathikan, Hanna, Lydia, Iqbal, Fahad Mujtaba, Acharya, Amish, Normahani, Pasha, Ashrafian, Hutan, Markar, Sheraz R., Sounderajah, Viknesh, Darzi, Ara
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9385087/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35977992
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00667-w
_version_ 1784769522058657792
author Wallace, William
Chan, Calvin
Chidambaram, Swathikan
Hanna, Lydia
Iqbal, Fahad Mujtaba
Acharya, Amish
Normahani, Pasha
Ashrafian, Hutan
Markar, Sheraz R.
Sounderajah, Viknesh
Darzi, Ara
author_facet Wallace, William
Chan, Calvin
Chidambaram, Swathikan
Hanna, Lydia
Iqbal, Fahad Mujtaba
Acharya, Amish
Normahani, Pasha
Ashrafian, Hutan
Markar, Sheraz R.
Sounderajah, Viknesh
Darzi, Ara
author_sort Wallace, William
collection PubMed
description Digital and online symptom checkers are an increasingly adopted class of health technologies that enable patients to input their symptoms and biodata to produce a set of likely diagnoses and associated triage advice. However, concerns regarding the accuracy and safety of these symptom checkers have been raised. This systematic review evaluates the accuracy of symptom checkers in providing diagnoses and appropriate triage advice. MEDLINE and Web of Science were searched for studies that used either real or simulated patients to evaluate online or digital symptom checkers. The primary outcomes were the diagnostic and triage accuracy of the symptom checkers. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess study quality. Of the 177 studies retrieved, 10 studies met the inclusion criteria. Researchers evaluated the accuracy of symptom checkers using a variety of medical conditions, including ophthalmological conditions, inflammatory arthritides and HIV. A total of 50% of the studies recruited real patients, while the remainder used simulated cases. The diagnostic accuracy of the primary diagnosis was low across included studies (range: 19–37.9%) and varied between individual symptom checkers, despite consistent symptom data input. Triage accuracy (range: 48.8–90.1%) was typically higher than diagnostic accuracy. Overall, the diagnostic and triage accuracy of symptom checkers are variable and of low accuracy. Given the increasing push towards adopting this class of technologies across numerous health systems, this study demonstrates that reliance upon symptom checkers could pose significant patient safety hazards. Large-scale primary studies, based upon real-world data, are warranted to demonstrate the adequate performance of these technologies in a manner that is non-inferior to current best practices. Moreover, an urgent assessment of how these systems are regulated and implemented is required.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9385087
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93850872022-08-18 The diagnostic and triage accuracy of digital and online symptom checker tools: a systematic review Wallace, William Chan, Calvin Chidambaram, Swathikan Hanna, Lydia Iqbal, Fahad Mujtaba Acharya, Amish Normahani, Pasha Ashrafian, Hutan Markar, Sheraz R. Sounderajah, Viknesh Darzi, Ara NPJ Digit Med Review Article Digital and online symptom checkers are an increasingly adopted class of health technologies that enable patients to input their symptoms and biodata to produce a set of likely diagnoses and associated triage advice. However, concerns regarding the accuracy and safety of these symptom checkers have been raised. This systematic review evaluates the accuracy of symptom checkers in providing diagnoses and appropriate triage advice. MEDLINE and Web of Science were searched for studies that used either real or simulated patients to evaluate online or digital symptom checkers. The primary outcomes were the diagnostic and triage accuracy of the symptom checkers. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess study quality. Of the 177 studies retrieved, 10 studies met the inclusion criteria. Researchers evaluated the accuracy of symptom checkers using a variety of medical conditions, including ophthalmological conditions, inflammatory arthritides and HIV. A total of 50% of the studies recruited real patients, while the remainder used simulated cases. The diagnostic accuracy of the primary diagnosis was low across included studies (range: 19–37.9%) and varied between individual symptom checkers, despite consistent symptom data input. Triage accuracy (range: 48.8–90.1%) was typically higher than diagnostic accuracy. Overall, the diagnostic and triage accuracy of symptom checkers are variable and of low accuracy. Given the increasing push towards adopting this class of technologies across numerous health systems, this study demonstrates that reliance upon symptom checkers could pose significant patient safety hazards. Large-scale primary studies, based upon real-world data, are warranted to demonstrate the adequate performance of these technologies in a manner that is non-inferior to current best practices. Moreover, an urgent assessment of how these systems are regulated and implemented is required. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-08-17 /pmc/articles/PMC9385087/ /pubmed/35977992 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00667-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review Article
Wallace, William
Chan, Calvin
Chidambaram, Swathikan
Hanna, Lydia
Iqbal, Fahad Mujtaba
Acharya, Amish
Normahani, Pasha
Ashrafian, Hutan
Markar, Sheraz R.
Sounderajah, Viknesh
Darzi, Ara
The diagnostic and triage accuracy of digital and online symptom checker tools: a systematic review
title The diagnostic and triage accuracy of digital and online symptom checker tools: a systematic review
title_full The diagnostic and triage accuracy of digital and online symptom checker tools: a systematic review
title_fullStr The diagnostic and triage accuracy of digital and online symptom checker tools: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed The diagnostic and triage accuracy of digital and online symptom checker tools: a systematic review
title_short The diagnostic and triage accuracy of digital and online symptom checker tools: a systematic review
title_sort diagnostic and triage accuracy of digital and online symptom checker tools: a systematic review
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9385087/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35977992
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00667-w
work_keys_str_mv AT wallacewilliam thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT chancalvin thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT chidambaramswathikan thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT hannalydia thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT iqbalfahadmujtaba thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT acharyaamish thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT normahanipasha thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT ashrafianhutan thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT markarsherazr thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT sounderajahviknesh thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT darziara thediagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT wallacewilliam diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT chancalvin diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT chidambaramswathikan diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT hannalydia diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT iqbalfahadmujtaba diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT acharyaamish diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT normahanipasha diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT ashrafianhutan diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT markarsherazr diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT sounderajahviknesh diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview
AT darziara diagnosticandtriageaccuracyofdigitalandonlinesymptomcheckertoolsasystematicreview