Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38096024›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023

Identifying Existing Evidence to Potentially Develop a Machine Learning Diagnostic Algorithm for Cough in Primary Care Settings: Scoping Review.

Julia Cummerow, Christin Wienecke, Nicola Engler, Philip Marahrens, Philipp Gruening, Jost Steinhäuser

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Julia Cummerow *Institute of Family Medicine, University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9228-751X
Christin Wienecke *Institute of Family Medicine, University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2128-1062
Nicola Engler *Institute of Family Medicine, University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4156-6831
Philip MarahrensInstitute of Family Medicine, University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7700-1875
Philipp GrueningInstitute for Neuro- and Bioinformatics, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2946-4020
Jost SteinhäuserInstitute of Family Medicine, University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9386-6078
University of Lübeck · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary care is known to be one of the most complex health care settings because of the high number of theoretically possible diagnoses. Therefore, the process of clinical decision-making in primary care includes complex analytical and nonanalytical factors such as gut feelings and dealing with uncertainties. Artificial intelligence is also mandated to offer support in finding valid diagnoses. Nevertheless, to translate some aspects of what occurs during a consultation into a machine-based diagnostic algorithm, the probabilities for the underlying diagnoses (odds ratios) need to be determined.

objectiveCough is one of the most common reasons for a consultation in general practice, the core discipline in primary care. The aim of this scoping review was to identify the available data on cough as a predictor of various diagnoses encountered in general practice. In the context of an ongoing project, we reflect on this database as a possible basis for a machine-based diagnostic algorithm. Furthermore, we discuss the applicability of such an algorithm against the background of the specifics of general practice.

methodsThe PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched with defined search terms, supplemented by the search for gray literature via the German Journal of Family Medicine until April 20, 2023. The inclusion criterion was the explicit analysis of cough as a predictor of any conceivable disease. Exclusion criteria were articles that did not provide original study results, articles in languages other than English or German, and articles that did not mention cough as a diagnostic predictor.

resultsIn total, 1458 records were identified for screening, of which 35 articles met our inclusion criteria. Most of the results (11/35, 31%) were found for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The others were distributed among the diagnoses of asthma or unspecified obstructive airway disease, various infectious diseases, bronchogenic carcinoma, dyspepsia or gastroesophageal reflux disease, and adverse effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Positive odds ratios were found for cough as a predictor of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, influenza, COVID-19 infections, and bronchial carcinoma, whereas the results for cough as a predictor of asthma and other nonspecified obstructive airway diseases were inconsistent.

conclusionsReliable data on cough as a predictor of various diagnoses encountered in general practice are scarce. The example of cough does not provide a sufficient database to contribute odds to a machine learning-based diagnostic algorithm in a meaningful way.

Indexed as

AsthmaPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveArtificial IntelligenceCoughHumansMachine LearningPrimary Health Careartificial intelligencecoughdifferential diagnosispredictorprimary health care

Identifiers

PMID38096024
PMCPMC10755665
OpenAlexW4389730528

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.