Internet Self-Diagnosis in Hand Surgery

Hageman, Michiel G.J.S.; Anderson, Jade A.; Blok, Robin D.; Bossen, Jeroen K. J.; Ring, David

doi:10.1007/s11552-014-9707-x

Cited by 23 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this case, the user must decide which condition describes their current state best. The likelihood of a user to accurately choose the right diagnosis is associated with the sociodemographic profile/variables of a user, such as education and gender [33]. For example, women and those with higher education were more likely to choose the correct diagnosis [33].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The likelihood of a user to accurately choose the right diagnosis is associated with the sociodemographic profile/variables of a user, such as education and gender [33]. For example, women and those with higher education were more likely to choose the correct diagnosis [33]. Therefore, although having a timely diagnosis is important, it may be counterproductive if the user considers the wrong treatment options owing to a misdiagnosis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Use of Artificially Intelligent Self-Diagnosing Digital Platforms by the General Public: Scoping Review

Aboueid¹,

Liu²,

Desta³

et al. 2019

JMIR Med Inform

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Self-diagnosis is the process of diagnosing or identifying a medical condition in oneself. Artificially intelligent digital platforms for self-diagnosis are becoming widely available and are used by the general public; however, little is known about the body of knowledge surrounding this technology. Objective The objectives of this scoping review were to (1) systematically map the extent and nature of the literature and topic areas pertaining to digital platforms that use computerized algorithms to provide users with a list of potential diagnoses and (2) identify key knowledge gaps. Methods The following databases were searched: PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Association for Computing Machinery Digital Library, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Google Scholar, Open Grey, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. The search strategy was developed and refined with the assistance of a librarian and consisted of 3 main concepts: (1) self-diagnosis; (2) digital platforms; and (3) public or patients. The search generated 2536 articles from which 217 were duplicates. Following the Tricco et al 2018 checklist, 2 researchers screened the titles and abstracts (n=2316) and full texts (n=104), independently. A total of 19 articles were included for review, and data were retrieved following a data-charting form that was pretested by the research team. Results The included articles were mainly conducted in the United States (n=10) or the United Kingdom (n=4). Among the articles, topic areas included accuracy or correspondence with a doctor’s diagnosis (n=6), commentaries (n=2), regulation (n=3), sociological (n=2), user experience (n=2), theoretical (n=1), privacy and security (n=1), ethical (n=1), and design (n=1). Individuals who do not have access to health care and perceive to have a stigmatizing condition are more likely to use this technology. The accuracy of this technology varied substantially based on the disease examined and platform used. Women and those with higher education were more likely to choose the right diagnosis out of the potential list of diagnoses. Regulation of this technology is lacking in most parts of the world; however, they are currently under development. Conclusions There are prominent research gaps in the literature surrounding the use of artificially intelligent self-diagnosing digital platforms. Given the variety of digital platforms and the wide array of diseases they cover, measuring accuracy is cumbersome. More research is needed to understand the user experience and inform regulations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Artificially Intelligent Self-Diagnosing Digital Platforms by the General Public: Scoping Review

Aboueid¹,

Liu²,

Desta³

et al. 2019

JMIR Med Inform

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, the correct diagnosis was listed first more often for common diagnoses than for uncommon diagnoses (38% vs 28%). Additional studies focusing on WebMD found that patients using the symptom checker in a hand surgery clinic correctly guessed a diagnosis matching that of the hand surgeon 33% of the time [32] and that with ear, nose, and throat patient cases, the symptom checker was correct 16% of the time, although the correct diagnosis was listed within the differential list 70% of the time [33].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Novel Insight Into the Challenges of Diagnosing Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Using Web-Based Symptom Checkers

Davies¹,

Munro²,

Kotter³

2019

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDegenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a common debilitating condition resulting from degeneration of the cervical spine. While decompressive surgery can halt disease progression, existing spinal cord damage is often permanent, leaving patients with lifelong disability. Early surgery improves the likelihood of recovery, yet the average time from the onset of symptoms to correct diagnosis is over 2 years. The majority of delays occur initially, before and within primary care, mainly due to a lack of recognition. Symptom checkers are widely used by patients before medical consultation and can be useful for preliminary triage and diagnosis. Lack of recognition of DCM by symptom checkers may contribute to the delay in diagnosis.ObjectiveThe aims of this study were to investigate whether Web-based symptom checkers were able to recognize relevant symptoms of DCM, to characterize the DCM differential they returned , and to evaluate the diagnostic performance of recognized DCM symptoms.MethodsWe pooled classical DCM symptoms from leading review articles. These symptoms were entered into the algorithms used by the top 20 symptom checker websites (N=4; Google Search). The most widely cited symptom checker, WebMD, was used to characterize the differential diagnosis for DCM symptoms.ResultsA total of 31 classical DCM symptoms were identified, of which 45% (14/31) listed DCM as a differential and 10% (3/31) placed DCM in the top third of the differential. The mean differential rank for motor symptoms was significantly better than that for arthritic symptoms (P=.01) and the average differential rank for all symptoms (P=.048). The symptom checker WebMD performed best at recognizing DCM, placing the condition nearer to the top of the differential list (mean rank of 5.6) than either Healthline (rank of 12.9, P=.02) or Healthtools.AARP (rank of 15.5, P=.001). On WebMD, only one combination of symptoms resulted in DCM as the primary differential: neck, shoulder, and arm pain with hand weakness. Moreover, 151 differential diagnoses for DCM symptoms were recorded on WebMD. Multiple sclerosis and peripheral neuropathy were the most common differentials, shortlisted for 52% (16/31) and 32% (10/31) of the DCM symptoms, respectively.ConclusionsDCM symptoms are poorly identified by Web-based symptom checkers, which leads to a large differential of many other common conditions. While a diagnosis becomes more likely as the number of symptoms increases, this represents more advanced disease and will not support much-needed earlier diagnosis. Symptom checkers remain an attractive concept with potential. Further research is required to support their optimization.

show abstract

“…Tanulmányunk alapján is különbség figyelhető meg a nemek közt, a nők gyakrabban használják az internetet egészségügyi tájékozódásra (a nők 76%-a, míg a férfiak 61%-a minimum havonta). Az interneten olvasottak alapján sokan diagnosztizálják, ill. kezelik önmagukat, melyeknek helyessége, ill. sikeressége nagyon változatos [4,5,6]. Tanulmányunkban a válaszadok közel kétharmada diagnosztizálta már önmagát, bevallásuk szerint több mint egyharmaduk sikerrel járt.…”

Section: Megbeszélésunclassified

“…Az internethasználók aránya 1052%-os növekedést mutatott az ezredforduló óta[1]. Tanulmányok igazolják, hogy egészségügyi tájékozódásra is nagyon sokan az interneten keresik a választ, sokan diagnózis felállítás céljából, sokan diétákra keresnek rá, ill. tüneteik kezelésére használják a világhálót[4,5,6]. A romániai lakosságra vonatkozóan hiányosak az adatok, nincsenek összehasonlító tanulmányok, amelyek nem, végzettség, életkor és régió szerint stratifikálva térképeznék fel az internethasználatot mint egészségügyi információforrás.…”

unclassified

Use of internet as source of medical information and its impact among young Transylvanian Hungarian people - a comparative study

Kocsis

Szabó

2018

Bulletin of Medical Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The internet is the most popular information source in our digital world. Studies confirm that numerous people are using the internet to look up health-related information. There is no information about this trend among the Transylvanian Hungarian population. Our purpose was to assess the role of the internet in answering health-related problems for young Hungarian Transylvanian people, and its impact. The participants (N=351) completed an online questionnaire with 28 items, which was available on Facebook, on the first page indicating their consent to a voluntary and anonymous survey. Our target was the generation below the age of 45. Descriptive, then comparative analysis was performed, based on gender and region of origin. 95.3% of the participants used the internet for finding health-related information, diagnosis, treatment or diet, without significant difference between subgroups, 70% at least once a month. Only 3.3% were instructed by their physician about the websites that provide health information, while 90% would require it. At least 64% of the respondents makes self-diagnosis at least sometimes, women more often, and nearly 25% frequently or always check the doctor’s opinion and/or the recommended treatment online. 40% of cases consider that their self-diagnosis was often the same as the physician’s final diagnosis, but only 33,2% agreed totally with their doctor. 47,4% of them were scared and/or became worried because of the information from the internet, especially women. Based on the above, it is clear that online health information overtakes the traditional doctor-centered health information and makes it necessary for us to change our perspective of digital healthcare.

show abstract

Internet Self-Diagnosis in Hand Surgery

Cited by 23 publications

References 13 publications

The Use of Artificially Intelligent Self-Diagnosing Digital Platforms by the General Public: Scoping Review

The Use of Artificially Intelligent Self-Diagnosing Digital Platforms by the General Public: Scoping Review

A Novel Insight Into the Challenges of Diagnosing Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Using Web-Based Symptom Checkers

Use of internet as source of medical information and its impact among young Transylvanian Hungarian people - a comparative study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About