ArticleJMIR formative research2022
A Novel Diagnostic Decision Support System for Medical Professionals: Prospective Feasibility Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04827342 (Feasibility and Functionality Test of Ada's DDSS Prototype, Exploring the Potential and Performance When Diagnosing Complex Cases of Dyspnea at the Emergency Department and Ward of Interna! Medicine of the University Hospital Basel), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
Feasibility and Functionality Test of Ada's DDSS Prototype, Exploring the Potential and Performance When Diagnosing Complex Cases of Dyspnea at the Emergency Department and Ward of Interna! Medicine of the University Hospital Basel
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acceptability, Usability, and Perceived Quality of Care of a Digital Decision Support System in Tele-Primary Health Care in Sindh, Pakistan: Sequential Explanatory Mixed Methods Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-based machine learning models for preoperative diagnosis and staging of ovarian tumors.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Monitoring and Follow-Up of Patients on Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Therapy Using Artificial Intelligence: The AIto-Control Project.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Psychological assessment of AI-based decision support systems: tool development and expected benefits.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2023Article
- Investigating the Potential for Clinical Decision Support in Sub-Saharan Africa With AFYA (Artificial Intelligence-Based Assessment of Health Symptoms in Tanzania): Protocol for a Prospective, Observational Pilot Study.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Diagnostic Performance of an App-Based Symptom Checker in Mental Disorders: Comparative Study in Psychotherapy Outpatients.JMIR mental health · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContinuously growing medical knowledge and the increasing amount of data make it difficult for medical professionals to keep track of all new information and to place it in the context of existing information. A variety of digital technologies and artificial intelligence-based methods are currently available as persuasive tools to empower physicians in clinical decision-making and improve health care quality. A novel diagnostic decision support system (DDSS) prototype developed by Ada Health GmbH with a focus on traceability, transparency, and usability will be examined more closely in this study.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to test the feasibility and functionality of a novel DDSS prototype, exploring its potential and performance in identifying the underlying cause of acute dyspnea in patients at the University Hospital Basel.
methodsA prospective, observational feasibility study was conducted at the emergency department (ED) and internal medicine ward of the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland. A convenience sample of 20 adult patients admitted to the ED with dyspnea as the chief complaint and a high probability of inpatient admission was selected. A study physician followed the patients admitted to the ED throughout the hospitalization without interfering with the routine clinical work. Routinely collected health-related personal data from these patients were entered into the DDSS prototype. The DDSS prototype's resulting disease probability list was compared with the gold-standard main diagnosis provided by the treating physician.
resultsThe DDSS presented information with high clarity and had a user-friendly, novel, and transparent interface. The DDSS prototype was not perfectly suited for the ED as case entry was time-consuming (1.5-2 hours per case). It provided accurate decision support in the clinical inpatient setting (average of cases in which the correct diagnosis was the first diagnosis listed: 6/20, 30%, SD 2.10%; average of cases in which the correct diagnosis was listed as one of the top 3: 11/20, 55%, SD 2.39%; average of cases in which the correct diagnosis was listed as one of the top 5: 14/20, 70%, SD 2.26%) in patients with dyspnea as the main presenting complaint.
conclusionsThe study of the feasibility and functionality of the tool was successful, with some limitations. Used in the right place, the DDSS has the potential to support physicians in their decision-making process by showing new pathways and unintentionally ignored diagnoses. The DDSS prototype had some limitations regarding the process of data input, diagnostic accuracy, and completeness of the integrated medical knowledge. The results of this study provide a basis for the tool's further development. In addition, future studies should be conducted with the aim to overcome the current limitations of the tool and study design.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04827342; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04827342.
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.