Articles by admin

No Image

Online Symptom Checkers Can't Replace The Real-Life Doc Just Yet

Let's see: fever, headache and dizziness.

Let’s see: fever, headache and dizziness. iStockphoto hide caption

itoggle caption iStockphoto

We’ve all been there before: headache, dizziness, sore throat. Uh-oh! Better Google the symptoms or maybe try WebMD’s online symptom checker to see what’s wrong.

But how accurate are these online symptoms checkers, anyway?

Turns out, millions of people are entrusting their health to some pretty lousy diagnostic systems.

Researchers tested 23 online symptom checkers and found that the correct diagnosis was provided first on a list of potential illnesses only about a third of the time. That means symptom checkers are spitting out wrong diagnoses two-thirds of the time.

“People who use these tools should be aware of their inaccuracy and not see them as gospel,” says Dr. Ateev Mehrotra, who led the research and is a professor of health care policy at Harvard Medical School. “They shouldn’t think that whatever the symptom checker says is what they have.”

The study, published Wednesday in The BMJ, examined some of the most popular online symptoms checkers, including Ask MD, iTriage, one from the U.K.’s National Health Service and another from the Mayo Clinic.

Each website was fed 45 standard patient vignettes with symptoms consistent with medical conditions ranging from acute liver failure and meningitis to mononucleosis and a simple bee sting.

The final information provided by the symptom checkers varied. Some provided a diagnosis, while others offered recommendations for care, such as stay at home, go to a doctor or head to the ER right away.

These treatment recommendations were right on compared to diagnosis accuracy, the research team says — at least when it came to emergency situations. In cases where the patients were seriously ill, the systems accurately urged them to head to the ER 80 percent of the time.

Timely treatment, Mehrotra says, is more important than getting the diagnosis exactly right. “If a patient isn’t feeling well, they’re thinking, ‘Is this something I have to take care of right away or can I stay home?'” he says. “We do not think distinguishing the exact problem is as important as getting to the hospital right away.”

On the other hand, the researchers found that the symptom checkers were overly cautious when it came to patients who had little cause for concern, suggesting they head to a clinic when staying home and having chicken soup was appropriate.

“Using computers to help diagnose and manage care is a new frontier,” Mehrotra says. “This is just the first generation [of symptoms checkers], and I’m hopeful that this research can help them improve.”

iMedicalApps founder Dr. Iltifat Husain agrees and is hopeful that the mobile health world will “mature and grow up” with time. Because current symptom checkers are so new, Husain, says he wasn’t surprised by the results.

“This is pretty consistent with what you see with medical-related apps out there now,” he says. “More and more studies are finding that apps are not using evidence-based techniques and that they don’t adequately reference medical content.”

However, that doesn’t stop Husain — an ER doctor at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center — from recommending online systems and apps like symptom checkers.

“If used appropriately, these apps can help raise red flags so a patient is more proactive and seeks care in a timely fashion,” he says. “Nailing the specific diagnosis right away isn’t necessarily as important as nailing down, ‘Do I need a health care provider?'”

Besides, Husain adds, diagnosis is what doctors are made for.

“Symptoms checkers shouldn’t be for getting that final diagnosis,” he says. “We spend upwards of seven years in medical school and residency to figure out how to diagnosis effectively and an application isn’t going to replace that.”

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.



No Image

Dismissed Reddit Figure Victoria Taylor Breaks Silence

Victoria Taylor's note on Reddit

Screengrab from Reddit

Victoria Taylor, famous for her role in Reddit’s popular r/IAmA section, has broken the silence over her dismissal that prompted an insurrection last week in which moderators shut down many of the site’s most popular sections.

Posting on Reddit, Taylor thanked those who rallied to her defense, calling the response “extraordinary.”

“I know many of you may be curious about what’s next for me, and I’m still figuring that out,” she wrote. “However, I can assure you, wherever the road leads, I will live up to the faith you’ve had in me.”

Taylor’s note comes just days after Reddit CEO Ellen Pao apologized to users of the popular website, citing a “long history of mistakes” that led to Taylor’s dismissal on July 2. Reddit has not publicly said why it let Taylor go, and Taylor’s own posting today does little to shed light on what happened.

Reddt’s r/IAmA (Ask Me Anything) section draws actors, musicians, President Obama and even NPR reporters to answer questions submitted from the vast community. Taylor’s role, as NPR’s Steve Mullis reported last week, “was often organizer, mediator and even transcriber for many of the AMAs.”

Steve reported that Taylor’s sudden departure prompted “moderators of r/IAmA [to] set the section to ‘private,’ effectively closing it to anyone but the moderators. Once word of Taylor’s firing began to spread, moderators of other popular sections (called subreddits) that cover movies, science, gaming and a host of others, also went private, making much of reddit essentially useless to regular site visitors.”

Reddit, which is commonly known as “the front page of the Internet,” has more than 160 million monthly visitors.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.






No Image

FIFA Bans Former Executive Committee Member Chuck Blazer For Life

Chuck Blazer, then-CONCACAF general secretary, attends a news conference in Frankfurt, Germany, on Feb. 14, 2005. FIFA banned him today for life over "various acts of misconduct."

Chuck Blazer, then-CONCACAF general secretary, attends a news conference in Frankfurt, Germany, on Feb. 14, 2005. FIFA banned him today for life over “various acts of misconduct.” Bernd Kammerer/AP hide caption

itoggle caption Bernd Kammerer/AP

FIFA has banned its former executive committee member Chuck Blazer from taking part in any aspect of soccer for life.

“Mr Blazer committed many and various acts of misconduct continuously and repeatedly during his time as an official in different high-ranking and influential positions at FIFA and CONCACAF,” FIFA said in a statement. “In his positions as a football official, he was a key player in schemes involving the offer, acceptance, payment and receipt of undisclosed and illegal payments, bribes and kickbacks as well as other money-making schemes.”

Blazer, if you recall, was the highest-ranking American in soccer’s governing body for years, and served as general secretary of CONCACAF, which runs the sport in North America and Central America, as well as the Caribbean.

He was one of 14 FIFA figures indicted by the Justice Department in May in connection with a corruption scheme that earned more than $150 million in bribes and kickbacks over the past two decades. Blazer, who has pleaded guilty and turned informant against corruption in FIFA, is said to have personally misappropriated $15 million during that period.

Today’s decision was based on an investigation by FIFA’s ethics committee.

The corruption scandal at soccer’s governing body forced the resignation in June of its chief, Sepp Blatter, who had been re-elected to another term as president just days earlier. He said he will stay on as president until a successor is elected.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.