The Role of Computerized Diagnostic Proposals in the Interpretation of the 12-lead Electrocardiogram by Cardiology and Non-Cardiology Fellows

Tomas Novotny, Raymond Bond, Irena Andrsova, Lumir Koc, Martina Sisakova, Dewar Finlay, Daniel Guldenring, Jindrich Spinar, Marek Malik

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Most contemporary 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) devices offer computerized diagnostic proposals. The reliability of these automated diagnoses is limited. It has been suggested that incorrect computer advice can influence physician decision-making. This study analyzed the role of diagnostic proposals in the decision process by a group of fellows of cardiology and other internal medicine subspecialties. Materials and methods: A set of 100 clinical 12-lead ECG tracings was selected covering both normal cases and common abnormalities. A team of 15 junior Cardiology Fellows and 15 Non-Cardiology Fellows interpreted the ECGs in 3 phases: without any diagnostic proposal, with a single diagnostic proposal (half of them intentionally incorrect), and with four diagnostic proposals (only one of them being correct) for each ECG. Self-rated confidence of each interpretation was collected. Results: Availability of diagnostic proposals significantly increased the diagnostic accuracy (p <0.001). Nevertheless, in case of a single proposal (either correct or incorrect) the increase of accuracy was present in interpretations with correct diagnostic proposals, while the accuracy was substantially reduced with incorrect proposals. Confidence levels poorly correlated with interpretation scores (rho ≈ 2, p
LanguageEnglish
Pages85-92
JournalInternational Journal of Medical Informatics
Volume101
Early online date14 Feb 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2017

Fingerprint

Cardiology
Electrocardiography
Group Processes
Internal Medicine
Decision Making
Physicians
Equipment and Supplies
Lead

Keywords

  • computerized diagnostic proposals
  • decision making
  • electrocardiogram interpretation
  • ECG
  • cardiology
  • decision support systems

Cite this

Novotny, Tomas ; Bond, Raymond ; Andrsova, Irena ; Koc, Lumir ; Sisakova, Martina ; Finlay, Dewar ; Guldenring, Daniel ; Spinar, Jindrich ; Malik, Marek. / The Role of Computerized Diagnostic Proposals in the Interpretation of the 12-lead Electrocardiogram by Cardiology and Non-Cardiology Fellows. 2017 ; Vol. 101. pp. 85-92.
@article{ce989072edb14c7db3ea6230995df359,
title = "The Role of Computerized Diagnostic Proposals in the Interpretation of the 12-lead Electrocardiogram by Cardiology and Non-Cardiology Fellows",
abstract = "Introduction: Most contemporary 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) devices offer computerized diagnostic proposals. The reliability of these automated diagnoses is limited. It has been suggested that incorrect computer advice can influence physician decision-making. This study analyzed the role of diagnostic proposals in the decision process by a group of fellows of cardiology and other internal medicine subspecialties. Materials and methods: A set of 100 clinical 12-lead ECG tracings was selected covering both normal cases and common abnormalities. A team of 15 junior Cardiology Fellows and 15 Non-Cardiology Fellows interpreted the ECGs in 3 phases: without any diagnostic proposal, with a single diagnostic proposal (half of them intentionally incorrect), and with four diagnostic proposals (only one of them being correct) for each ECG. Self-rated confidence of each interpretation was collected. Results: Availability of diagnostic proposals significantly increased the diagnostic accuracy (p <0.001). Nevertheless, in case of a single proposal (either correct or incorrect) the increase of accuracy was present in interpretations with correct diagnostic proposals, while the accuracy was substantially reduced with incorrect proposals. Confidence levels poorly correlated with interpretation scores (rho ≈ 2, p",
keywords = "computerized diagnostic proposals, decision making, electrocardiogram interpretation, ECG, cardiology, decision support systems",
author = "Tomas Novotny and Raymond Bond and Irena Andrsova and Lumir Koc and Martina Sisakova and Dewar Finlay and Daniel Guldenring and Jindrich Spinar and Marek Malik",
note = "Compliant in UIR; evidence uploaded in 'Other files'",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.02.007",
language = "English",
volume = "101",
pages = "85--92",

}

The Role of Computerized Diagnostic Proposals in the Interpretation of the 12-lead Electrocardiogram by Cardiology and Non-Cardiology Fellows. / Novotny, Tomas; Bond, Raymond; Andrsova, Irena; Koc, Lumir; Sisakova, Martina; Finlay, Dewar; Guldenring, Daniel; Spinar, Jindrich; Malik, Marek.

Vol. 101, 05.2017, p. 85-92.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Role of Computerized Diagnostic Proposals in the Interpretation of the 12-lead Electrocardiogram by Cardiology and Non-Cardiology Fellows

AU - Novotny, Tomas

AU - Bond, Raymond

AU - Andrsova, Irena

AU - Koc, Lumir

AU - Sisakova, Martina

AU - Finlay, Dewar

AU - Guldenring, Daniel

AU - Spinar, Jindrich

AU - Malik, Marek

N1 - Compliant in UIR; evidence uploaded in 'Other files'

PY - 2017/5

Y1 - 2017/5

N2 - Introduction: Most contemporary 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) devices offer computerized diagnostic proposals. The reliability of these automated diagnoses is limited. It has been suggested that incorrect computer advice can influence physician decision-making. This study analyzed the role of diagnostic proposals in the decision process by a group of fellows of cardiology and other internal medicine subspecialties. Materials and methods: A set of 100 clinical 12-lead ECG tracings was selected covering both normal cases and common abnormalities. A team of 15 junior Cardiology Fellows and 15 Non-Cardiology Fellows interpreted the ECGs in 3 phases: without any diagnostic proposal, with a single diagnostic proposal (half of them intentionally incorrect), and with four diagnostic proposals (only one of them being correct) for each ECG. Self-rated confidence of each interpretation was collected. Results: Availability of diagnostic proposals significantly increased the diagnostic accuracy (p <0.001). Nevertheless, in case of a single proposal (either correct or incorrect) the increase of accuracy was present in interpretations with correct diagnostic proposals, while the accuracy was substantially reduced with incorrect proposals. Confidence levels poorly correlated with interpretation scores (rho ≈ 2, p

AB - Introduction: Most contemporary 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) devices offer computerized diagnostic proposals. The reliability of these automated diagnoses is limited. It has been suggested that incorrect computer advice can influence physician decision-making. This study analyzed the role of diagnostic proposals in the decision process by a group of fellows of cardiology and other internal medicine subspecialties. Materials and methods: A set of 100 clinical 12-lead ECG tracings was selected covering both normal cases and common abnormalities. A team of 15 junior Cardiology Fellows and 15 Non-Cardiology Fellows interpreted the ECGs in 3 phases: without any diagnostic proposal, with a single diagnostic proposal (half of them intentionally incorrect), and with four diagnostic proposals (only one of them being correct) for each ECG. Self-rated confidence of each interpretation was collected. Results: Availability of diagnostic proposals significantly increased the diagnostic accuracy (p <0.001). Nevertheless, in case of a single proposal (either correct or incorrect) the increase of accuracy was present in interpretations with correct diagnostic proposals, while the accuracy was substantially reduced with incorrect proposals. Confidence levels poorly correlated with interpretation scores (rho ≈ 2, p

KW - computerized diagnostic proposals

KW - decision making

KW - electrocardiogram interpretation

KW - ECG

KW - cardiology

KW - decision support systems

UR - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1386505617300382

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.02.007

DO - 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.02.007

M3 - Article

VL - 101

SP - 85

EP - 92

ER -