CONTEXT: The Heart Disease Program (HDP) is a novel computerized diagnosis program incorporating a computer model of cardiovascular physiology. Physicians can enter standard clinical data and receive a differential diagnosis with explanations. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the HDP and its usability by physicians in a typical clinical setting. DESIGN: A prospective observational study of the HDP in use by physicians in departments of medicine and cardiology of a teaching hospital. Data came from 114 patients with a broad range of cardiac disorders, entered by six physicians. MEASUREMENTS: Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV). Comprehensiveness: the proportion of final diagnoses suggested by the HDP or physicians for each case. RELEVANCE: the proportion of HDP or physicians' diagnoses that are correct. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) for the HDP and the physicians. Performance was compared with a final diagnosis based on follow-up and further investigations. RESULTS: Compared with the final diagnoses, the HDP had a higher sensitivity (53.0% vs. 34.8%) and significantly higher comprehensiveness (57.2% vs. 39.5%, p < 0.0001) than the physicians. Physicians' PPV and relevance (56.2%, 56.0%) were higher than the HDP (25.4%, 28.1%). Combining the diagnoses of the physicians and the HDPs, sensitivity was 61.3% and comprehensiveness was 65.7%. These findings were significant in the two collection cohorts and for subanalysis of the most serious diagnoses. The AUCs were similar for the HDP and the physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The heart disease program has the potential to improve the differential diagnoses of physicians in a typical clinical setting.
CONTEXT: The Heart Disease Program (HDP) is a novel computerized diagnosis program incorporating a computer model of cardiovascular physiology. Physicians can enter standard clinical data and receive a differential diagnosis with explanations. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the HDP and its usability by physicians in a typical clinical setting. DESIGN: A prospective observational study of the HDP in use by physicians in departments of medicine and cardiology of a teaching hospital. Data came from 114 patients with a broad range of cardiac disorders, entered by six physicians. MEASUREMENTS: Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV). Comprehensiveness: the proportion of final diagnoses suggested by the HDP or physicians for each case. RELEVANCE: the proportion of HDP or physicians' diagnoses that are correct. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) for the HDP and the physicians. Performance was compared with a final diagnosis based on follow-up and further investigations. RESULTS: Compared with the final diagnoses, the HDP had a higher sensitivity (53.0% vs. 34.8%) and significantly higher comprehensiveness (57.2% vs. 39.5%, p < 0.0001) than the physicians. Physicians' PPV and relevance (56.2%, 56.0%) were higher than the HDP (25.4%, 28.1%). Combining the diagnoses of the physicians and the HDPs, sensitivity was 61.3% and comprehensiveness was 65.7%. These findings were significant in the two collection cohorts and for subanalysis of the most serious diagnoses. The AUCs were similar for the HDP and the physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The heart disease program has the potential to improve the differential diagnoses of physicians in a typical clinical setting.
Authors: C P Friedman; A S Elstein; F M Wolf; G C Murphy; T M Franz; P S Heckerling; P L Fine; T M Miller; V Abraham Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-11-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: W W Stead; R B Haynes; S Fuller; C P Friedman; L E Travis; J R Beck; C H Fenichel; B Chandrasekaran; B G Buchanan; E E Abola Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 1994 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: C J McDonald; S L Hui; D M Smith; W M Tierney; S J Cohen; M Weinberger; G P McCabe Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1984-01 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Linda C Santelices; Yajuan Wang; Don Severyn; Marek J Druzdzel; Robert L Kormos; James F Antaki Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Marc Mitchell; Bethany L Hedt; Ingrid Eshun-Wilson; Hamish Fraser; Melanie-Anne John; Colin Menezes; Martin P Grobusch; Jonathan Jackson; Jantjie Taljaard; Neal Lesh Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2011-12-16 Impact factor: 4.046