Technology-Supported Self-Triage Decision Making: A Mixed-Methods Study

Marvin Kopka, Sonja Mei Wang, Samira Kunz, Christine Schmid, Markus A. Feufel
{"title":"Technology-Supported Self-Triage Decision Making: A Mixed-Methods Study","authors":"Marvin Kopka, Sonja Mei Wang, Samira Kunz, Christine Schmid, Markus A. Feufel","doi":"10.1101/2024.09.12.24313558","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Symptom-Assessment Application (SAAs) and Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used by laypeople to navigate care options. Although humans ultimately make a final decision when using these systems, previous research has typically examined the performance of humans and SAAs/LLMs separately. Thus, it is unclear how decision-making unfolds in such hybrid human-technology teams and if SAAs/LLMs can improve laypeople's decisions. To address this gap, we conducted a convergent parallel mixed-methods study with semi-structured interviews and a randomized controlled trial. Our interview data revealed that in human-technology teams, decision-making is influenced by factors before, during, and after interaction. Users tend to rely on technology for information gathering and analysis but remain responsible for information integration and the final decision. Based on these results, we developed a model for technology-assisted self-triage decision-making. Our quantitative results indicate that when using a high-performing SAA, laypeople's decision accuracy improved from 53.2% to 64.5% (OR = 2.52, p < .001). In contrast, decision accuracy remained unchanged when using a LLM (54.8% before vs. 54.2% after usage, p = .79). These findings highlight the importance of studying SAAs/LLMs with humans in the loop, as opposed to analyzing them in isolation.","PeriodicalId":501454,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Informatics","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.12.24313558","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Symptom-Assessment Application (SAAs) and Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used by laypeople to navigate care options. Although humans ultimately make a final decision when using these systems, previous research has typically examined the performance of humans and SAAs/LLMs separately. Thus, it is unclear how decision-making unfolds in such hybrid human-technology teams and if SAAs/LLMs can improve laypeople's decisions. To address this gap, we conducted a convergent parallel mixed-methods study with semi-structured interviews and a randomized controlled trial. Our interview data revealed that in human-technology teams, decision-making is influenced by factors before, during, and after interaction. Users tend to rely on technology for information gathering and analysis but remain responsible for information integration and the final decision. Based on these results, we developed a model for technology-assisted self-triage decision-making. Our quantitative results indicate that when using a high-performing SAA, laypeople's decision accuracy improved from 53.2% to 64.5% (OR = 2.52, p < .001). In contrast, decision accuracy remained unchanged when using a LLM (54.8% before vs. 54.2% after usage, p = .79). These findings highlight the importance of studying SAAs/LLMs with humans in the loop, as opposed to analyzing them in isolation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
技术辅助下的自我分诊决策:混合方法研究
非专业人士越来越多地使用症状评估应用程序(SAA)和大语言模型(LLM)来指导医疗选择。虽然人类在使用这些系统时最终会做出决定,但以往的研究通常都是分别考察人类和 SAA/LLM 的表现。因此,目前还不清楚在这种人类-技术混合团队中决策是如何展开的,也不清楚 SAA/LLM 是否能改善非专业人士的决策。为了填补这一空白,我们采用半结构式访谈和随机对照试验进行了一项融合并行的混合方法研究。我们的访谈数据显示,在人类-技术团队中,决策会受到互动前、互动中和互动后各种因素的影响。用户倾向于依赖技术来收集和分析信息,但仍对信息整合和最终决策负责。基于这些结果,我们开发了一个技术辅助自我分层决策模型。我们的定量结果表明,当使用高性能的 SAA 时,非专业人士的决策准确率从 53.2% 提高到 64.5%(OR = 2.52,p <.001)。相比之下,使用 LLM 时,决策准确率保持不变(使用前为 54.8% ,使用后为 54.2%,p = .79)。这些发现突出表明,与孤立地分析SAA/LLMs相比,与人类一起研究SAA/LLMs具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A case is not a case is not a case - challenges and solutions in determining urolithiasis caseloads using the digital infrastructure of a clinical data warehouse Reliable Online Auditory Cognitive Testing: An observational study Federated Multiple Imputation for Variables that Are Missing Not At Random in Distributed Electronic Health Records Characterizing the connection between Parkinson's disease progression and healthcare utilization Generative AI and Large Language Models in Reducing Medication Related Harm and Adverse Drug Events - A Scoping Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1