ArticlePloS one2021
Performance of a new symptom checker in patient triage: Canadian cohort study.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Triage and Diagnostic Accuracy of Online Symptom Checkers: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- 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
- Evaluating digital triage symptom checker with historical triage-related adverse events.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- Authentication status and AI triage concordance among care seekers in a US health system.npj health systems · 2026Article
- Remote triage and virtual urgent care services: A qualitative assessment of factors that impact triage decisions and outcomes.Journal of telemedicine and telecare · 2026Article
- Real-World Evaluation of the Eye+Dot Online Triage Support Tool in Community Optometry Practices: Mixed Methods Evaluation Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Article
- Accuracy of Dental Symptom Checker Web Application in the Singapore Military Population.International dental journal · 2025Article
- Accuracy of online symptom assessment applications, large language models, and laypeople for self-triage decisions.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Use of a Kiosk-Model Self-Triage System for COVID-19 Triage.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- A comparison of self-triage tools to nurse driven triage in the emergency department.PloS one · 2024Article
- Comparison of Diagnostic and Triage Accuracy of Ada Health and WebMD Symptom Checkers, ChatGPT, and Physicians for Patients in an Emergency Department: Clinical Data Analysis Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2023Article
- Diagnostic Performance, Triage Safety, and Usability of a Clinical Decision Support System Within a University Hospital Emergency Department: Algorithm Performance and Usability Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Diagnostic and Triage Accuracy and Usability of a Symptom Checker in an Emergency Department: Observational Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Observational
- A scoping review on the use and usefulness of online symptom checkers and triage systems: How to proceed?Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComputerized algorithms known as symptom checkers aim to help patients decide what to do should they have a new medical concern. However, despite widespread implementation, most studies on symptom checkers have involved simulated patients. Only limited evidence currently exists about symptom checker safety or accuracy when used by real patients. We developed a new prototype symptom checker and assessed its safety and accuracy in a prospective cohort of patients presenting to primary care and emergency departments with new medical concerns.
methodA prospective cohort study was done to assess the prototype's performance. The cohort consisted of adult patients (≥16 years old) who presented to hospital emergency departments and family physician clinics. Primary outcomes were safety and accuracy of triage recommendations to seek hospital care, seek primary care, or manage symptoms at home.
resultsData from 281 hospital patients and 300 clinic patients were collected and analyzed. Sensitivity to emergencies was 100% (10/10 encounters). Sensitivity to urgencies was 90% (73/81) and 97% (34/35) for hospital and primary care patients, respectively. The prototype was significantly more accurate than patients at triage (73% versus 58%, p<0.01). Compliance with triage recommendations in this cohort using this iteration of the symptom checker would have reduced hospital visits by 55% but cause potential harm in 2-3% from delay in care.
interpretationThe prototype symptom checker was superior to patients in deciding the most appropriate treatment setting for medical issues. This symptom checker could reduce a significant number of unnecessary hospital visits, with accuracy and safety outcomes comparable to existing data on telephone triage.
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.