SummaryThis paper reports a controlled prospective unselected real-time comparison of human and computer-aided diagnosis in a series of 304 patients suffering from abdominal pain of acute onset.The computing system's overall diagnostic accuracy (91-8%) was significantly higher than that of the most (79 6%). It is suggested as a result of these studies that the provision of such a system to aid the clinician is both feasible in a real-time clinical setting, and likely to be of practical value, albeit in a small percentage of cases.
This paper reports a controlled trial of human and computer-aided diagnosis in a series of 552 patients with acute abdominal pain. The overall diagnostic accuracy of the computer-aided system was 91.5% and that of the senior clinician to see each case was 81.2%. However, the clinician's diagnostic performance improved markedly during the period of the trial. The proportion of appendices which perforated before operation fell from 36% to 4% during the trial, and the negative laparotomy rate dropped sharply. After the trial closed in August 1972 these figures reverted towards their pretrial levels.It is suggested that while computer-aided diagnosis is a valuable direct adjunct to the clinician dealing with the "acute abdomen," he may also benefit in the short-term from the constant feedback he receives and from the disciplines and constraints involved in communicating with the computer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.