A study published last week in the
British Medical Journal and
reported in Reuters Health and other general interest media suggested that physicians might turn to Google as a diagnostic aid.
In the simulation run by the journal authors, Google selected the
correct diagnosis 58% of the time.
While the idea of using Google as an ersatz clinical decision-support
system is clever, a 58% accuracy rate is unacceptable -- in either a
human clinician or a software program. Google, of course, was not
designed for this purpose. It uses a Boolean search engine -- with
and/or logic -- to scan a massive, unverified database, the Internet.
Older-generation diagnosis-decision software systems have much higher
accuracy rates. In addition, the latest generation of diagnosis
reminder systems, such as Isabel, consistently suggest the proper
diagnosis 90% of the time. These new programs use advanced
natural-language processing algorithms -- a newer, more powerful search
technique -- to scan a specific database of medical journals and texts.
This produces more accurate, higher-quality search results.
The aim of diagnosis support software is to support, not replace, the
"learned intermediary" by providing highly reliable medical
information in an easy-to-use format. Google is great for some
things, but it would be a mistake for physicians to rely on it in
critical cases.
Joseph Britto, M.D.
Chief executive
officer
Isabel Healthcare
Reston, Va.
Comment on today's news and share your opinions with other readers.
Submit your letter to Your Views at hitsdaily@crain.com.
Submissions must include name, title, affiliation, city and state.
Health IT Strategist reserves the right to edit all
submissions for news value, style, grammar, length and
appropriateness. For more information, contact Webmaster/Copy Editor
Patrick Shrader at pshrader@crain.com.
