‘You should see a doctor’, said the robot: Reflections on a digital diagnostic device in a pandemic age

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

‘You should see a doctor’, said the robot: Reflections on a digital diagnostic device in a pandemic age. / Haase, Christoffer Bjerre; Brodersen, John; Hoeyer, Klaus; Risør, Torsten; Bearman, Margaret.

I: Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, Bind 49, Nr. 1, 2021, s. 33-36.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Haase, CB, Brodersen, J, Hoeyer, K, Risør, T & Bearman, M 2021, '‘You should see a doctor’, said the robot: Reflections on a digital diagnostic device in a pandemic age', Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, bind 49, nr. 1, s. 33-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494820980268

APA

Haase, C. B., Brodersen, J., Hoeyer, K., Risør, T., & Bearman, M. (2021). ‘You should see a doctor’, said the robot: Reflections on a digital diagnostic device in a pandemic age. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 49(1), 33-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494820980268

Vancouver

Haase CB, Brodersen J, Hoeyer K, Risør T, Bearman M. ‘You should see a doctor’, said the robot: Reflections on a digital diagnostic device in a pandemic age. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. 2021;49(1):33-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494820980268

Author

Haase, Christoffer Bjerre ; Brodersen, John ; Hoeyer, Klaus ; Risør, Torsten ; Bearman, Margaret. / ‘You should see a doctor’, said the robot: Reflections on a digital diagnostic device in a pandemic age. I: Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. 2021 ; Bind 49, Nr. 1. s. 33-36.

Bibtex

@article{1dd342e53d614101abbcfe016bb48d02,
title = "{\textquoteleft}You should see a doctor{\textquoteright}, said the robot: Reflections on a digital diagnostic device in a pandemic age",
abstract = "Aims:In three days at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Copenhagen Emergency Medical Services developed a digital diagnostic device. The purpose was to assess and triage potential COVID-19 symptoms and to reduce the number of calls to public health-care helplines. The device was used almost 150,000 times in a few weeks and was described by politicians and administrators as a solution and success. However, high usage cannot serve as the sole criterion of success. What might be adequate criteria? And should digital triage for citizens by default be considered low risk?Methods:This paper reflects on the uncertain aspects of the performance, risks and issues of accountability pertaining to the digital diagnostic device in order to draw lessons for future improvements. The analysis is based on the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM), the EU and US regulations of medical devices and the taxonomy of uncertainty in health care by Han et al.Results:Lessons for future digital devices are (a) the need for clear criteria of success, (b) the importance of awareness of other severe diseases when triaging, (c) the priority of designing the device to collect data for evaluation and (d) clear allocation of responsibilities.Conclusions:A device meant to substitute triage for citizens according to its own criteria of success should not by default be considered as low risk. In a pandemic age dependent on digitalisation, it is therefore important not to abandon the ethos of EBM, but instead to prepare the ground for new ways of building evidence of effect.",
author = "Haase, {Christoffer Bjerre} and John Brodersen and Klaus Hoeyer and Torsten Ris{\o}r and Margaret Bearman",
year = "2021",
doi = "10.1177/1403494820980268",
language = "English",
volume = "49",
pages = "33--36",
journal = "Acta socio-medica Scandinavica",
issn = "1403-4948",
publisher = "SAGE Publications",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - ‘You should see a doctor’, said the robot: Reflections on a digital diagnostic device in a pandemic age

AU - Haase, Christoffer Bjerre

AU - Brodersen, John

AU - Hoeyer, Klaus

AU - Risør, Torsten

AU - Bearman, Margaret

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Aims:In three days at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Copenhagen Emergency Medical Services developed a digital diagnostic device. The purpose was to assess and triage potential COVID-19 symptoms and to reduce the number of calls to public health-care helplines. The device was used almost 150,000 times in a few weeks and was described by politicians and administrators as a solution and success. However, high usage cannot serve as the sole criterion of success. What might be adequate criteria? And should digital triage for citizens by default be considered low risk?Methods:This paper reflects on the uncertain aspects of the performance, risks and issues of accountability pertaining to the digital diagnostic device in order to draw lessons for future improvements. The analysis is based on the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM), the EU and US regulations of medical devices and the taxonomy of uncertainty in health care by Han et al.Results:Lessons for future digital devices are (a) the need for clear criteria of success, (b) the importance of awareness of other severe diseases when triaging, (c) the priority of designing the device to collect data for evaluation and (d) clear allocation of responsibilities.Conclusions:A device meant to substitute triage for citizens according to its own criteria of success should not by default be considered as low risk. In a pandemic age dependent on digitalisation, it is therefore important not to abandon the ethos of EBM, but instead to prepare the ground for new ways of building evidence of effect.

AB - Aims:In three days at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Copenhagen Emergency Medical Services developed a digital diagnostic device. The purpose was to assess and triage potential COVID-19 symptoms and to reduce the number of calls to public health-care helplines. The device was used almost 150,000 times in a few weeks and was described by politicians and administrators as a solution and success. However, high usage cannot serve as the sole criterion of success. What might be adequate criteria? And should digital triage for citizens by default be considered low risk?Methods:This paper reflects on the uncertain aspects of the performance, risks and issues of accountability pertaining to the digital diagnostic device in order to draw lessons for future improvements. The analysis is based on the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM), the EU and US regulations of medical devices and the taxonomy of uncertainty in health care by Han et al.Results:Lessons for future digital devices are (a) the need for clear criteria of success, (b) the importance of awareness of other severe diseases when triaging, (c) the priority of designing the device to collect data for evaluation and (d) clear allocation of responsibilities.Conclusions:A device meant to substitute triage for citizens according to its own criteria of success should not by default be considered as low risk. In a pandemic age dependent on digitalisation, it is therefore important not to abandon the ethos of EBM, but instead to prepare the ground for new ways of building evidence of effect.

U2 - 10.1177/1403494820980268

DO - 10.1177/1403494820980268

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 33339468

VL - 49

SP - 33

EP - 36

JO - Acta socio-medica Scandinavica

JF - Acta socio-medica Scandinavica

SN - 1403-4948

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 254670634