Googling a diagnosis?
From the New England Journal of Medicine (subscription req’d):
- At a recent case conference with a distinguished visiting professor, a fellow in allergy and immunology presented the case of an infant with diarrhea; an unusual rash (”alligator skin”); multiple immunologic abnormalities, including low T-cell function; tissue eosinophilia (of the gastric mucosa) as well as peripheral eosinophilia; and an apparent X-linked genetic pattern (several male relatives died in infancy). The attending physicians and house staff discussed several diagnostic possibilities, but no consensus was reached. Finally, the visiting professor asked the fellow if she had made a diagnosis, and she reported that she had indeed and mentioned a rare syndrome known as IPEX (immunodeficiency, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, X-linked). It appeared to fit the case, and everyone seemed satisfied. (Several weeks later, genetic testing on the baby revealed a mutation in the FOXP3 gene, confirming the diagnosis.)
“How did you make that diagnosis?” asked the professor. Came the reply, “Well, I had the skin-biopsy report, and I had a chart of the immunologic tests. So I entered the salient features into Google, and it popped right up.”
“William Osler,” I offered, “must be turning over in his grave. You googled the diagnosis?”
Translation: “You don’t need my big brain?”
Talk about point-of-care learning—with so many folks working on building a knowledge system for physicians, could it be we already have the solution in Google?
(Via Medpundit)











November 21st, 2005 at 2:13 pm
Sue, this is a very scary trend. Google Scholar is useful IF the relevant records happen to have been dumped in Google’s database, and IF the searcher just happens to choose the same words the authors have used. Coverage in Google is sporadic and unreliable. There is no subject index like MeSH to search. You can get lucky (Google’s “I’m feeling lucky”) which the fellow in this case clearly did, but there is no substitute for expert MEDLINE searching.
My two Canadian cents’ worth. — Anne
November 21st, 2005 at 3:06 pm
I was being a bit sarcastic–you’re right, Anne, that this could be a dangerous thing to do, and there is a need for a specialized, peer-reviewed, constantly updated resource for healthcare professionals to use for point-of-care learning. I just thought this was bizarre.
November 10th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
Sue,
I found the article interesting. It did point out shortcomings in their Google searches for medical diagnoses, but one can expect refinements and increased accuracy in the diagnosis of patients using such web based medical data bases. There are certainly many health care providers who use Emedicine as a source of medical information.
Respectfully,
Ward Merkeley, M.D.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment:
Register Here or Log in Here.
Subscribe to Capsules
To receive a daily e-mail digest of Capsules posts:
Contact Sue
Recent Posts
Calendar
Categories
Archives
Your Account