Collective intelligence in medical decision-making: a systematic scoping review

BackgroundCollective intelligence, facilitated by information technology or manual techniques, refers to the collective insight of groups working on a task and has the potential to generate more accurate information or decisions than individuals can make alone. This concept is gaining traction in healthcare and has potential in enhancing diagnostic accuracy. We aim to characterize the current state of research with respect to collective intelligence in medical decision-making and describe a framework for diverse studies in this topic.MethodsFor this systematic scoping review, we conducted a systematic search for published literature using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL on August 8, 2017. We included studies that combined the insights of two or more medical experts to make decisions related to patient care. Studies that examined medical decisions such as diagnosis, treatment, and management in the context of an actual or theoretical patient case were included. We include studies of complex medical decision-making rather than identification of a visual finding, as in radiology or pathology. We differentiate between medical decisions, in which synthesis of multiple types of information is required over time, and studies of radiological scans or pathological specimens, in which objective identification of a visual finding is performed. Two reviewers performed article screening, data extraction, and final inclusion for analysis.ResultsOf 3303 original articles, 15 were included. Each study examined the medical decisions of two or more individuals; however, studies were heterogeneous in their methods and outcomes. We present a framework to characterize these diverse studies, and future investigations, based on how they operationalize collective intelligence for medical decision-making: 1) how the initial decision task was completed (group vs. individual), 2) how opinions were synthesized (information technology vs. manual vs. in-person), and 3) the availability of collective intelligence to participants.DiscussionCollective intelligence in medical decision-making is gaining popularity to advance medical decision-making and holds promise to improve patient outcomes. However, heterogeneous methods and outcomes make it difficult to assess the utility of collective intelligence approaches across settings and studies. A better understanding of collective intelligence and its applications to medicine may improve medical decision-making.

[1]  Henry A. Kautz,et al.  Crowdsourcing medical expertise in near real time. , 2014, Journal of hospital medicine.

[2]  J. R. Larson,et al.  Diagnosing groups: the pooling, management, and impact of shared and unshared case information in team-based medical decision making. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  J. R. Ball,et al.  Improving Diagnosis in Health Care: Highlights of a Report From the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine , 2016, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[4]  J. R. Larson,et al.  Diagnosing groups : Charting the flow of information in medical decision-making teams , 1996 .

[5]  Stefan Krause,et al.  Swarm intelligence in animals and humans. , 2010, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[6]  T. Kameda,et al.  Human Collective Intelligence under Dual Exploration-Exploitation Dilemmas , 2014, PloS one.

[7]  Ralf H. J. M. Kurvers,et al.  Collective Intelligence Meets Medical Decision-Making: The Collective Outperforms the Best Radiologist , 2015, PloS one.

[8]  C. Umscheid A Primer on Performing Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. , 2013, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[9]  D Spruijt-Metz,et al.  Variation in diagnoses: influence of specialists' training on selecting and ranking relevant information in geriatric case vignettes. , 1996, Social science & medicine.

[10]  M. Kattan,et al.  Clinicians versus nomogram: predicting future technetium-99m bone scan positivity in patients with rising prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. , 2013, Urology.

[11]  A. Greiner,et al.  Health Professions Education: A Bridge to Quality , 2003 .

[12]  Wolfgang Gaissmaier,et al.  Diagnostic performance by medical students working individually or in teams. , 2015, JAMA.

[13]  Ralf H. J. M. Kurvers,et al.  Self-organized flexible leadership promotes collective intelligence in human groups , 2015, Royal Society Open Science.

[14]  Jens Krause,et al.  Detection Accuracy of Collective Intelligence Assessments for Skin Cancer Diagnosis. , 2015, JAMA dermatology.

[15]  Olga Kunina-Habenicht,et al.  Assessing clinical reasoning (ASCLIRE): Instrument development and validation , 2015, Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice.

[16]  C. Zucchermaglio,et al.  Diagnostic Decision Making in Oncology: Creating Shared Knowledge and Managing Complexity , 2015 .

[17]  Philippe Ravaud,et al.  Mapping of Crowdsourcing in Health: Systematic Review , 2018, Journal of medical Internet research.

[18]  D. Meyer,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Som Text Figs. S1 to S6 References Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups , 2022 .

[19]  Ricard V. Solé,et al.  Synthetic collective intelligence , 2016, Biosyst..

[20]  Edmund A. Mennis The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies, and Nations , 2006 .

[21]  Laura A. Levit,et al.  Finding what works in health care : standards for systematic reviews , 2011 .

[22]  Ann C. Greiner,et al.  Health Professions Education: A Bridge to Quality , 2004 .

[23]  Robert F Bunting,et al.  From To Err Is Human to Improving Diagnosis in Health Care: The risk management perspective. , 2016, Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management.

[24]  José Luis Sánchez-Cervantes,et al.  Collective intelligence in medical diagnosis systems: A case study , 2016, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[25]  Clare Liddy,et al.  Electronic consultation systems: worldwide prevalence and their impact on patient care-a systematic review. , 2016, Family practice.

[26]  Laura A. Levit,et al.  COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS FOR SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH , 2011 .

[27]  Michael Lawrence Barnett,et al.  Comparative Accuracy of Diagnosis by Collective Intelligence of Multiple Physicians vs Individual Physicians , 2019, JAMA network open.

[28]  F. Wright,et al.  The role of collegial interaction in continuing professional development , 2007, The Journal of continuing education in the health professions.

[29]  Mitchell H. Tsai,et al.  The use of Twitter to facilitate sharing of clinical expertise in urology , 2018, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[30]  Susanne P. Lajoie,et al.  Supporting collaboration with technology: does shared cognition lead to co-regulation in medicine? , 2011, Metacognition and Learning.

[31]  S. Nundy,et al.  Comparison of Physician and Computer Diagnostic Accuracy. , 2016, JAMA internal medicine.

[32]  J. Clayton-Smith,et al.  Collaborative Crowdsourcing for the Diagnosis of Rare Genetic Syndromes: The DYSCERNE Experience , 2015, Public Health Genomics.

[33]  J. R. Larson,et al.  Diagnosing groups: charting the flow of information in medical decision-making teams. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[34]  Marek Balazinski,et al.  Fuzzy-logic–assisted Surgical Planning in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis , 2009, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[35]  D. Parker,et al.  Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews , 2015, International journal of evidence-based healthcare.

[36]  F. Galton Vox Populi , 1907, Nature.

[37]  Christopher J Brady,et al.  Crowdsourcing: an overview and applications to ophthalmology , 2016, Current opinion in ophthalmology.