Trial reportArthritis research & therapy2021
Accuracy and usability of a diagnostic decision support system in the diagnosis of three representative rheumatic diseases: a randomized controlled trial among medical students.
Trial report in Arthritis research & therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Large language models enhance diagnostic reasoning of medical students in rheumatology: a randomized controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Comparison of Two Symptom Checkers (Ada and Symptoma) in the Emergency Department: Randomized, Crossover, Head-to-Head, Double-Blinded Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Trial
- Diagnostic Accuracy of a Mobile AI-Based Symptom Checker and a Web-Based Self-Referral Tool in Rheumatology: Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Trial
- Improving decision accuracy using a clinical decision support system for medical students during history-taking: a randomized clinical trial.BMC medical education · 2023Trial
- Accuracy and tolerability of self-sampling of capillary blood for analysis of inflammation and autoantibodies in rheumatoid arthritis patients-results from a randomized controlled trial.Arthritis research & therapy · 2022Trial
- A Systematic Review of Factors Affecting Utilization of Decision Support Systems: The Interplay Between Technology, Users, and the Healthcare Environment.Health science reports · 2026Review
- [Large language models in rheumatology : New ways of knowledge transfer].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2026Review
- Diagnostic performance of Prof. Valmed, ChatGPT-5 Thinking, and OpenEvidence in rheumatology: A comparative evaluation.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
- Perceptions, Usage, and Educational Impact of ChatGPT Among Medical Students in Germany: Cross-Sectional Mixed Methods Survey.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Comparative analysis of large language models and traditional diagnostic decision support systems for rare rheumatic disease identification.EULAR rheumatology open · 2025Article
- Technology-supported self-triage decision making.npj health systems · 2025Article
- Rheumatology in the digital health era: status quo and quo vadis?Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2024Review
- Stepwise asynchronous telehealth assessment of patients with suspected axial spondyloarthritis: results from a pilot study.Rheumatology international · 2024Article
- Harnessing ChatGPT and GPT-4 for evaluating the rheumatology questions of the Spanish access exam to specialized medical training.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- An AI-Powered Clinical Decision Support System to Predict Flares in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- At-home blood self-sampling in rheumatology: a qualitative study with patients and health care professionals.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Comparison of physician and artificial intelligence-based symptom checker diagnostic accuracy.Rheumatology international · 2022Article
- Online Symptom Checkers: Recommendations for a Vignette-Based Clinical Evaluation Standard.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Diagnostic and Triage Accuracy and Usability of a Symptom Checker in an Emergency Department: Observational Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn increasing number of diagnostic decision support systems (DDSS) exist to support patients and physicians in establishing the correct diagnosis as early as possible. However, little evidence exists that supports the effectiveness of these DDSS. The objectives were to compare the diagnostic accuracy of medical students, with and without the use of a DDSS, and the diagnostic accuracy of the DDSS system itself, regarding the typical rheumatic diseases and to analyze the user experience.
methodsA total of 102 medical students were openly recruited from a university hospital and randomized (unblinded) to a control group (CG) and an intervention group (IG) that used a DDSS (Ada - Your Health Guide) to create an ordered diagnostic hypotheses list for three rheumatic case vignettes. Diagnostic accuracy, measured as the presence of the correct diagnosis first or at all on the hypothesis list, was the main outcome measure and evaluated for CG, IG, and DDSS.
resultsThe correct diagnosis was ranked first (or was present at all) in CG, IG, and DDSS in 37% (40%), 47% (55%), and 29% (43%) for the first case; 87% (94%), 84% (100%), and 51% (98%) in the second case; and 35% (59%), 20% (51%), and 4% (51%) in the third case, respectively. No significant benefit of using the DDDS could be observed. In a substantial number of situations, the mean probabilities reported by the DDSS for incorrect diagnoses were actually higher than for correct diagnoses, and students accepted false DDSS diagnostic suggestions. DDSS symptom entry greatly varied and was often incomplete or false. No significant correlation between the number of symptoms extracted and diagnostic accuracy was seen. It took on average 7 min longer to solve a case using the DDSS. In IG, 61% of students compared to 90% in CG stated that they could imagine using the DDSS in their future clinical work life.
conclusionsThe diagnostic accuracy of medical students was superior to the DDSS, and its usage did not significantly improve students' diagnostic accuracy. DDSS usage was time-consuming and may be misleading due to prompting wrong diagnoses and probabilities.
trial registrationDRKS.de, DRKS00024433 . Retrospectively registered on February 5, 2021.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.