The Effectiveness of Electronic Differential Diagnoses (DDX) Generators: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Nicholas Riches, Maria Panagioti, Rahul Alam, Sudeh Cheraghi-Sohi, Stephen Campbell, Aneez Esmail and Peter Bower

PLOS ONE, 2016, vol. 11, issue 3, 1-26

Abstract: Background: Diagnostic errors are costly and they can contribute to adverse patient outcomes, including avoidable deaths. Differential diagnosis (DDX) generators are electronic tools that may facilitate the diagnostic process. Methods and Findings: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and utility of DDX generators. We undertook a comprehensive search of the literature including 16 databases from inception to May 2015 and specialist patient safety databases. We also searched the reference lists of included studies. Article screening, selection and data extraction were independently conducted by 2 reviewers. 36 articles met the eligibility criteria and the pooled accurate diagnosis retrieval rate of DDX tools was high with high heterogeneity (pooled rate = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.63 to 0.77; I2 = 97%, p

Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0148991 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 48991&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0148991

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148991

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().