Data entries were stored automatically by the CHT program.
#Nitro reader 5 ended prematurely because of an error software
The second was expert system software trained to interview patients with acute chest pain, i. The first of these was physicians providing routine ED care and entering their findings into an electronic health record (EHR). The results we report are from a within person study in which the experimental intervention was deployment of two different methods for collecting and storing medical history data. Materials and methods Experimental design We compare medical history data collected and entered into EHRs by physicians with history data collected by CHT at the same ED visit from 410 patients presenting to an emergency department (ED) with acute chest pain. We bring attention to the possible value of CHT in the present work. automated, dynamic history taking as a patient interacts with a computer. Yet today, there is scant academic interest in developing expert systems for computerized history taking (CHT), i. It was realized even at the beginning of the computer-age that expert system software could solve these problems.
The key barriers to effective history-taking by physicians are insufficient time with patients and the enormity of the knowledge for history-taking. And since inadequate history data can lead to diagnostic errors, it appears that we need better methods for history-taking than physicians interviewing patients.
But real-time observations reveal too that there are deficiencies in the history-taking process as such.
These inadequacies may reflect, in part, poor documentation of what the physician knows about the patient. Whenever studied, however, medical history data recorded by physicians is found consistently to be incomplete, inaccurate, biased, and not always fact-based. Medical histories are the salient datasets for characterizing clinical states and informing diagnostic and treatment decisions.
0 kommentar(er)
