Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

What is the suitability of clinical vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers? An audit study

View ORCID ProfileAusten El-Osta, Iman Webber, Aos Alaa, View ORCID ProfileEmmanouil Bagkeris, Saba Mian, View ORCID ProfileMansour Sharabiani, View ORCID ProfileAzeem Majeed
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.29.21261320
Austen El-Osta
1Imperial College London Self-Care Academic Research Unit (SCARU)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Austen El-Osta
  • For correspondence: a.el-osta{at}imperial.ac.uk
Iman Webber
1Imperial College London Self-Care Academic Research Unit (SCARU)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Aos Alaa
1Imperial College London Self-Care Academic Research Unit (SCARU)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Emmanouil Bagkeris
2Imperial College London, National Health & Lung Institute
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Emmanouil Bagkeris
Saba Mian
1Imperial College London Self-Care Academic Research Unit (SCARU)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mansour Sharabiani
3Imperial College London, Department of Primary Care & Public Health
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mansour Sharabiani
Azeem Majeed
3Imperial College London, Department of Primary Care & Public Health
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Azeem Majeed
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Objective To assess the suitability of primary care vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers

Design Observational study using publicly available, free online symptom checkers

Participants Three symptom checkers (Healthily, Ada and Babylon) that provided consultations in English. 139 standardized patient vignettes were compiled by RCGP. Three independent GPs interpreted the vignettes to arrive at a “Gold Standard” consisting of 3 dispositions and divided into one of three categories of triage urgency: (1) emergency care required, (2) primary care required and (3) self-care.

Main outcome measures Six professional non-medical and lay inputters simulated 2774 standardized patient evaluations using 3 online symptom checkers (OSC). We recorded when OSC provided a triage recommendation and whether it correctly recommended the appropriate triage recommendation across three categories of triage urgency (emergency care, primary care or self-care). We collected data on whether the solution appeared within the first 3 dispositions in each of the standards across 2774 standardized patient evaluations.

Results When benchmarked against the Gold Standard, Healthily provided an appropriate triage recommendation 61.9% of the time compared to 45.3% and 42.4% of the time for Babylon and Ada respectively. There was poor agreement between OSC consultation outcome and Gold Standard dispositions. When compared to the Gold Standard, Healthily gave an unsafe “under-triage” recommendation 28.6% of the time overall across the three categories compared to 43.3% for Ada and 47.5% for Babylon (P<0.001).

Conclusions OSCs recommended ‘very unsafe’ triages only <4% of the time suggesting that the online consultation tools are generally working at a safe level of risk. Primary care vignettes are a helpful tool to support development of OSC, but not ideally suited to benchmark the performance of different OSC. Real-world evidence studies involving general practice are recommended to benchmark the performance of OSC in the community setting.

Strengths and limitations of this study

  • 139 independently created primary care vignettes covering 18 subcategories of primary care were used to benchmark the performance of three online symptom checkers using 2774 unique patient simulations

  • A gold standard for each primary care vignette was derived using GP roundtables and single blinded testing

  • We investigated the extent that different inputters using the same vignette and online symptom checker received differing consultation outcomes and triage recommendations

  • We developed an accuracy matrix to objectively monitor online symptom checker consultation outcome and the safety of the triage recommendation

  • Limitations included a different number of inputters to simulate patients across the three online symptom checkers tested

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

Unconditional funding for this work was provided by Healthily (Imperial Self- Care 2020/1). The Funder did not have a role in study design or analysis. Austen El-Osta and Azeem Majeed are supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) North West London. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Imperial College London Research Ethics Committee

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • i.webber{at}imperial.ac.uk, aos.alaa18{at}imperial.ac.uk, e.bagkeris{at}imperial.ac.uk, s.mian{at}imperial.ac.uk, mansour.taghavi-azar-sharabiani05{at}imperial.ac.uk, a.majeed{at}imperial.ac.uk

Data Availability

No additional data are available

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted July 31, 2021.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
What is the suitability of clinical vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers? An audit study
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
What is the suitability of clinical vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers? An audit study
Austen El-Osta, Iman Webber, Aos Alaa, Emmanouil Bagkeris, Saba Mian, Mansour Sharabiani, Azeem Majeed
medRxiv 2021.07.29.21261320; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.29.21261320
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
What is the suitability of clinical vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers? An audit study
Austen El-Osta, Iman Webber, Aos Alaa, Emmanouil Bagkeris, Saba Mian, Mansour Sharabiani, Azeem Majeed
medRxiv 2021.07.29.21261320; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.29.21261320

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Public and Global Health
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (349)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Anesthesia (181)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (2648)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (316)
  • Dermatology (223)
  • Emergency Medicine (399)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (942)
  • Epidemiology (12228)
  • Forensic Medicine (10)
  • Gastroenterology (759)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (4103)
  • Geriatric Medicine (387)
  • Health Economics (680)
  • Health Informatics (2657)
  • Health Policy (1005)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (985)
  • Hematology (363)
  • HIV/AIDS (851)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13695)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (797)
  • Medical Education (399)
  • Medical Ethics (109)
  • Nephrology (436)
  • Neurology (3882)
  • Nursing (209)
  • Nutrition (577)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (739)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (695)
  • Oncology (2030)
  • Ophthalmology (585)
  • Orthopedics (240)
  • Otolaryngology (306)
  • Pain Medicine (250)
  • Palliative Medicine (75)
  • Pathology (473)
  • Pediatrics (1115)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (466)
  • Primary Care Research (452)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3432)
  • Public and Global Health (6527)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1403)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (814)
  • Respiratory Medicine (871)
  • Rheumatology (409)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (410)
  • Sports Medicine (342)
  • Surgery (448)
  • Toxicology (53)
  • Transplantation (185)
  • Urology (165)