Beyond Dr. Google: the evidence on consumer-facing digital tools for diagnosis
- PMID: 30032130
- DOI: 10.1515/dx-2018-0009
Beyond Dr. Google: the evidence on consumer-facing digital tools for diagnosis
Abstract
Over a third of adults go online to diagnose their health condition. Direct-to-consumer (DTC), interactive, diagnostic apps with information personalization capabilities beyond those of static search engines are rapidly proliferating. While these apps promise faster, more convenient and more accurate information to improve diagnosis, little is known about the state of the evidence on their performance or the methods used to evaluate them. We conducted a scoping review of the peer-reviewed and gray literature for the period January 1, 2014–June 30, 2017. We found that the largest category of evaluations involved symptom checkers that applied algorithms to user-answered questions, followed by sensor-driven apps that applied algorithms to smartphone photos, with a handful of evaluations examining crowdsourcing. The most common clinical areas evaluated were dermatology and general diagnostic and triage advice for a range of conditions. Evaluations were highly variable in methodology and conclusions, with about half describing app characteristics and half examining actual performance. Apps were found to vary widely in functionality, accuracy, safety and effectiveness, although the usefulness of this evidence was limited by a frequent failure to provide results by named individual app. Overall, the current evidence base on DTC, interactive diagnostic apps is sparse in scope, uneven in the information provided and inconclusive with respect to safety and effectiveness, with no studies of clinical risks and benefits involving real-world consumer use. Given that DTC diagnostic apps are rapidly evolving, rigorous and standardized evaluations are essential to inform decisions by clinicians, patients, policymakers and other stakeholders.
Keywords: consumerism; crowdsourcing; diagnostic error; digital health; evidence-based medicine; health apps; health information technology; mHealth; patient engagement.
Similar articles
-
Safety of patient-facing digital symptom checkers.Lancet. 2018 Nov 24;392(10161):2263-2264. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32819-8. Epub 2018 Nov 6. Lancet. 2018. PMID: 30413281 No abstract available.
-
The Reviews Are in: A Qualitative Content Analysis of Consumer Perspectives on Apps for Bipolar Disorder.J Med Internet Res. 2017 Apr 7;19(4):e105. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7273. J Med Internet Res. 2017. PMID: 28389420 Free PMC article.
-
App Characteristics and Accuracy Metrics of Available Digital Biomarkers for Autism: Scoping Review.JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2023 Nov 17;11:e52377. doi: 10.2196/52377. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2023. PMID: 37976084 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Existing Barriers Faced by and Future Design Recommendations for Direct-to-Consumer Health Care Artificial Intelligence Apps: Scoping Review.J Med Internet Res. 2023 Dec 18;25:e50342. doi: 10.2196/50342. J Med Internet Res. 2023. PMID: 38109173 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Usability and Acceptability of Everhealthier Women, a Mobile Application to Enhance Informed Health Choices.J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2018 Nov;47(6):853-861. doi: 10.1016/j.jogn.2018.04.139. Epub 2018 Jul 2. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2018. PMID: 30415655
Cited by
-
Evolutionary Trends in the Adoption, Adaptation, and Abandonment of Mobile Health Technologies: Viewpoint Based on 25 Years of Research.J Med Internet Res. 2024 Sep 27;26:e62790. doi: 10.2196/62790. J Med Internet Res. 2024. PMID: 39331463 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of the accuracy and readability of ChatGPT-4 and Google Gemini in providing information on retinal detachment: a multicenter expert comparative study.Int J Retina Vitreous. 2024 Sep 2;10(1):61. doi: 10.1186/s40942-024-00579-9. Int J Retina Vitreous. 2024. PMID: 39223678 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of information accuracy and clarity: ChatGPT responses to the most frequently asked questions about premature ejaculation.Sex Med. 2024 Jun 2;12(3):qfae036. doi: 10.1093/sexmed/qfae036. eCollection 2024 Jun. Sex Med. 2024. PMID: 38832125 Free PMC article.
-
Evolution of publicly available large language models for complex decision-making in breast cancer care.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024 Jul;310(1):537-550. doi: 10.1007/s00404-024-07565-4. Epub 2024 May 29. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024. PMID: 38806945 Free PMC article.
-
Artificial intelligence insights into osteoporosis: assessing ChatGPT's information quality and readability.Arch Osteoporos. 2024 Mar 19;19(1):17. doi: 10.1007/s11657-024-01376-5. Arch Osteoporos. 2024. PMID: 38499716
References
-
- Improving Diagnosis in Health Care. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2015. Available at: http://iom.nationalacademies.org/Reports/2015/Improving-Diagnosis-in-Hea.... Accessed: 14 Jun 2016.
-
- Fox S, Duggan M. Health Online 2013. 2013. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/01/15/health-online-2013/. Accessed: 12 Jul 2017.
-
- Brabham DC, Ribisl KM, Kirchner TR, Bernhardt JM. Crowdsourcing applications for public health. Am J Prev Med 2014;46:179–87.
-
- O’Reilly T. What is Web 2.0. 2005. Available at: http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html. Accessed: 15 Dec 2017.
-
- Research2guidance. The mHealth App Market is Getting Crowded. 2016. Available at: https://research2guidance.com/mhealth-app-market-getting-crowded-259000-.... Accessed: 4 Sep 2017.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources