Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Research review: a computer-based diagnostic model for individual case review.

L M Lau1, H R Warner, A L Poulsen

  • 1University of Utah Health Sciences Center.

Topics in Health Information Management
|January 8, 1995
PubMed
Summary

The diagnostic expert system Iliad detects errors, but its effectiveness varied when compared to different physician groups. Physician expertise significantly impacts the confirmation of Iliad-flagged diagnostic errors.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Patient-centered Systems.

Yearbook of medical informatics·2016
Same author

Graduate Program in Medical Informatics at the University of Utah.

Yearbook of medical informatics·2016
Same author

COMPUTER SYSTEMS AS CLINICAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL DIAGNOSTIC METHODS.

A listing of research in the cardiovascular field·2014
Same author

HPV vaccination in Hong Kong: implications for medical education.

Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP·2011
Same author

International Consensus Conference "Performance in top sports involving intense exercise".

Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports·2010
Same author

Assay discrepancy in mild haemophilia A: entire population study in a National Haemophilia Centre.

Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia·2009

Area of Science:

  • Medical Informatics
  • Clinical Decision Support
  • Healthcare Quality Improvement

Background:

  • Previous research indicated the Iliad diagnostic expert system identifies errors missed by peer review organization (PRO) review.
  • The prior study utilized volunteer physicians from a single institution as the gold standard for review.
  • Variations in gold standard reviewers may influence the perceived performance of diagnostic expert systems.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the performance of the Iliad diagnostic expert system using a different gold standard reviewer group.
  • To compare Iliad's diagnostic error detection capabilities against the Unified Clinical Data Set used by the Utah PRO (UPRO).
  • To investigate the impact of reviewer expertise on the confirmation rate of Iliad-identified diagnostic errors.

Main Methods:

Related Experiment Videos

  • A second experiment was conducted comparing Iliad with the Unified Clinical Data Set.
  • Utah PRO (UPRO) review physicians served as the gold standard reviewers in this experiment.
  • Physician agreement between institutional and UPRO reviewers was assessed.

Main Results:

  • Iliad successfully detected diagnostic errors not identified by the UPRO review.
  • The confirmation rate of Iliad flags was notably lower in this study compared to the previous one.
  • There was a lack of agreement between institutional and UPRO physicians, with one physician bridging both groups.

Conclusions:

  • The type of gold standard physician reviewers employed significantly influences the confirmation rate of diagnostic errors flagged by the Iliad system.
  • Differences in reviewer expertise between institutional and UPRO physicians may explain the discrepancy in Iliad's performance.
  • Further research is needed to standardize gold standard review processes for diagnostic expert systems.