The Potential of Evidence-Based Clinical Intake Tools to Discover or Ground Prevalence of Symptoms Using Real-Life Digital Health Encounters: Retrospective Cohort Study

Eden Avnat, Michael Samin, Daniel Ben Joya, Eyal Schneider, Elia Yanko, Dafna Eshel, Shahar Ovadia, Yossi Lev, Daniel Souroujon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: Evidence-based clinical intake tools (EBCITs) are structured assessment tools used to gather information about patients and help health care providers make informed decisions. The growing demand for personalized medicine, along with the big data revolution, has rendered EBCITs a promising solution. EBCITs have the potential to provide comprehensive and individualized assessments of symptoms, enabling accurate diagnosis, while contributing to the grounding of medical care. Objective: This work aims to examine whether EBCITs cover data concerning disorders and symptoms to a similar extent as physicians, and thus can reliably address medical conditions in clinical settings. We also explore the potential of EBCITs to discover and ground the real prevalence of symptoms in different disorders thereby expanding medical knowledge and further supporting medical diagnoses made by physicians. Methods: Between August 1, 2022, and January 15, 2023, patients who used the services of a digital health care (DH) provider in the United States were first assessed by the Kahun EBCIT. Kahun platform gathered and analyzed the information from the sessions. This study estimated the prevalence of patients’ symptoms in medical disorders using 2 data sets. The first data set analyzed symptom prevalence, as determined by Kahun’s knowledge engine. The second data set analyzed symptom prevalence, relying solely on data from the DH patients gathered by Kahun. The variance difference between these 2 prevalence data sets helped us assess Kahun’s ability to incorporate new data while integrating existing knowledge. To analyze the comprehensiveness of Kahun’s knowledge engine, we compared how well it covers weighted data for the symptoms and disorders found in the 2019 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NMCAS). To assess Kahun’s diagnosis accuracy, physicians independently diagnosed 250 of Kahun-DH’s sessions. Their diagnoses were compared with Kahun’s diagnoses. Results: In this study, 2550 patients used Kahun to complete a full assessment. Kahun proposed 108,523 suggestions related to symptoms during the intake process. At the end of the intake process, 6496 conditions were presented to the caregiver. Kahun covered 94% (526,157,569/562,150,572) of the weighted symptoms and 91% (1,582,637,476/173,4783,244) of the weighted disorders in the 2019 NMCAS. In 90% (224/250) of the sessions, both physicians and Kahun suggested at least one identical disorder, with a 72% (367/507) total accuracy rate. Kahun’s engine yielded 519 prevalences while the Kahun-DH cohort yielded 599; 156 prevalences were unique to the latter and 443 prevalences were shared by both data sets. Conclusions: ECBITs, such as Kahun, encompass extensive amounts of knowledge and could serve as a reliable database for inferring medical insights and diagnoses. Using this credible database, the potential prevalence of symptoms in different disorders was discovered or grounded. This highlights the ability of ECBITs to refine the understanding of relationships between disorders and symptoms, which further supports physicians in medical diagnosis.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere49570
JournalJournal of Medical Internet Research
Volume26
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jan 2024
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • big data
  • clinical intake tool
  • digital health
  • evidence-based medicine
  • prevalence
  • symptoms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Informatics

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The Potential of Evidence-Based Clinical Intake Tools to Discover or Ground Prevalence of Symptoms Using Real-Life Digital Health Encounters: Retrospective Cohort Study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this