Slashdot Mirror


Google Used To Diagnose Disease

dptalia writes "About 20% of all diseases are misdiagnosed, a percentage that has remained steady since the 1930s. However, scientists have discovered that by inputting the key symptoms into Google they can get the correct diagnosis about 58% of the time. For rare and unusual diseases, this provides doctors the information they need to get a correct cure. Of course, Google is only as good as its knowledge base, and its users, so this isn't a cure for everything."

4 of 167 comments (clear)

  1. 20% error compared to 42% error of Google? by epsalon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What the blurb doesn't say, how much of the 58% google gets right overlaps with the 20% doctors get wrong, if at all.

  2. Since we're using famous websites by mnmn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There should be a global wiki for medical professionals searchable by symptoms.

    The contribution weight of better/senior/more respected doctors should be higher compared to new graduates. The wide open public should not be allowed to write, but should be allowed to read it.

    This way better healthcare will be available in poor countries with Internet access, people will be able to double-check their diagnosis online and better doctors will be able to make a name for themselves the way CowboyNeal has.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  3. I would prefer by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If there was a publically available performance/competency grade for doctors online so I could just google for a good doctor in my area rather than hoping some med student hits paydirt with an 'I feel lucky search'

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
  4. No... by tkrotchko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The write-up is a bit funny and misleading.

    It's saying of the 20% that's mis-diagnosed, Google correctly identified 58% of those.

    However, what no one has brought up is that when something is misdiagnosed, no one knows until they do the autopsy, so you can't just do simple math to lower the error rate to 8%. As you suggest, while google does better when the doctor is wrong, Google is worse than the doctor when he's correct. I'm not sure it's even correct to assume that if the doctor used Google the diagnoses would be better or worse, since there is an element of human judgment in medical practice.

    What is does suggest is that doctors and patients should consider using Google to do a check on their patients and themselves for diagnosis and treatment options.

    --
    You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you