Technology is advancing rapidly, but computers still do not surpass physicians when it comes to making a diagnosis.
Can technology one day replace the doctor? This fear aroused by the considerable progress of information technology over the past 2 decades is shared by many healthcare professionals. But let them be reassured, the supremacy of man in medicine is not yet called into question, according to a study published this week in the JAMA Internal Medicine.
Researchers at Harvard School of Medicine have indeed shown that the performance of doctors in terms of diagnosis is far superior to that of software, and other ultra-sophisticated algorithms. Clinicians were able to give correct answers twice as often as medical diagnostic apps available on smartphones.
To reach this conclusion, 234 internal medicine specialists challenged 23 software programs selected by the researchers. Practitioners were asked to assess 45 clinical cases for which they had to determine the most likely diagnosis and suggest two more. Result: 3 times out of 4 the initial diagnosis given by the doctors was the correct one against barely 1 time out of 3 for the computer, and 84% of the time the correct diagnosis was part of the 3 answers to be provided, against 51% for the applications .
Diagnostic assistance software
The significant failure rate of software is related to its inability to recognize disease or to do so within the allotted time. The authors add that the differences between doctors and technology were even greater for severe cases and little-known conditions.
“Since computer programs are clearly inferior to physicians, it will be essential to study future generations of software which may become more and more precise,” said Prof. Ateev Mehrotra, a specialist in public health.
The researchers point out, however, that doctors were wrong in 15% of cases. They therefore suggest that IT decision-support tools be developed in order to reduce these diagnostic errors. “Classic diagnosis is more an art than a science,” comments the head of the work. Technology therefore has a future full of promises in this area ”.
.
