The Triage Capability of Laypersons: Retrospective Exploratory Analysis

BackgroundAlthough medical decision-making may be thought of as a task involving health professionals, many decisions, including critical health–related decisions are made by laypersons alone. Specifically, as the first step to most care episodes, it is the patient who determ...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marvin Kopka, Markus A Feufel, Felix Balzer, Malte L Schmieding
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: JMIR Publications 2022-10-01
Series:JMIR Formative Research
Online Access:https://formative.jmir.org/2022/10/e38977
_version_ 1797734630090080256
author Marvin Kopka
Markus A Feufel
Felix Balzer
Malte L Schmieding
author_facet Marvin Kopka
Markus A Feufel
Felix Balzer
Malte L Schmieding
author_sort Marvin Kopka
collection DOAJ
description BackgroundAlthough medical decision-making may be thought of as a task involving health professionals, many decisions, including critical health–related decisions are made by laypersons alone. Specifically, as the first step to most care episodes, it is the patient who determines whether and where to seek health care (triage). Overcautious self-assessments (ie, overtriaging) may lead to overutilization of health care facilities and overcrowded emergency departments, whereas imprudent decisions (ie, undertriaging) constitute a risk to the patient’s health. Recently, patient-facing decision support systems, commonly known as symptom checkers, have been developed to assist laypersons in these decisions. ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to identify factors influencing laypersons’ ability to self-triage and their risk averseness in self-triage decisions. MethodsWe analyzed publicly available data on 91 laypersons appraising 45 short fictitious patient descriptions (case vignettes; N=4095 appraisals). Using signal detection theory and descriptive and inferential statistics, we explored whether the type of medical decision laypersons face, their confidence in their decision, and sociodemographic factors influence their triage accuracy and the type of errors they make. We distinguished between 2 decisions: whether emergency care was required (decision 1) and whether self-care was sufficient (decision 2). ResultsThe accuracy of detecting emergencies (decision 1) was higher (mean 82.2%, SD 5.9%) than that of deciding whether any type of medical care is required (decision 2, mean 75.9%, SD 5.25%; t>90=8.4; P<.001; Cohen d=0.9). Sensitivity for decision 1 was lower (mean 67.5%, SD 16.4%) than its specificity (mean 89.6%, SD 8.6%) whereas sensitivity for decision 2 was higher (mean 90.5%, SD 8.3%) than its specificity (mean 46.7%, SD 15.95%). Female participants were more risk averse and overtriaged more often than male participants, but age and level of education showed no association with participants’ risk averseness. Participants’ triage accuracy was higher when they were certain about their appraisal (2114/3381, 62.5%) than when being uncertain (378/714, 52.9%). However, most errors occurred when participants were certain of their decision (1267/1603, 79%). Participants were more commonly certain of their overtriage errors (mean 80.9%, SD 23.8%) than their undertriage errors (mean 72.5%, SD 30.9%; t>89=3.7; P<.001; d=0.39). ConclusionsOur study suggests that laypersons are overcautious in deciding whether they require medical care at all, but they miss identifying a considerable portion of emergencies. Our results further indicate that women are more risk averse than men in both types of decisions. Layperson participants made most triage errors when they were certain of their own appraisal. Thus, they might not follow or even seek advice (eg, from symptom checkers) in most instances where advice would be useful.
first_indexed 2024-03-12T12:47:08Z
format Article
id doaj.art-239a069344874843a1a7d6bbc7df785d
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2561-326X
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-12T12:47:08Z
publishDate 2022-10-01
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format Article
series JMIR Formative Research
spelling doaj.art-239a069344874843a1a7d6bbc7df785d2023-08-28T23:15:09ZengJMIR PublicationsJMIR Formative Research2561-326X2022-10-01610e3897710.2196/38977The Triage Capability of Laypersons: Retrospective Exploratory AnalysisMarvin Kopkahttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-3848-1471Markus A Feufelhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0563-8831Felix Balzerhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1575-2056Malte L Schmiedinghttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-5844-7791 BackgroundAlthough medical decision-making may be thought of as a task involving health professionals, many decisions, including critical health–related decisions are made by laypersons alone. Specifically, as the first step to most care episodes, it is the patient who determines whether and where to seek health care (triage). Overcautious self-assessments (ie, overtriaging) may lead to overutilization of health care facilities and overcrowded emergency departments, whereas imprudent decisions (ie, undertriaging) constitute a risk to the patient’s health. Recently, patient-facing decision support systems, commonly known as symptom checkers, have been developed to assist laypersons in these decisions. ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to identify factors influencing laypersons’ ability to self-triage and their risk averseness in self-triage decisions. MethodsWe analyzed publicly available data on 91 laypersons appraising 45 short fictitious patient descriptions (case vignettes; N=4095 appraisals). Using signal detection theory and descriptive and inferential statistics, we explored whether the type of medical decision laypersons face, their confidence in their decision, and sociodemographic factors influence their triage accuracy and the type of errors they make. We distinguished between 2 decisions: whether emergency care was required (decision 1) and whether self-care was sufficient (decision 2). ResultsThe accuracy of detecting emergencies (decision 1) was higher (mean 82.2%, SD 5.9%) than that of deciding whether any type of medical care is required (decision 2, mean 75.9%, SD 5.25%; t>90=8.4; P<.001; Cohen d=0.9). Sensitivity for decision 1 was lower (mean 67.5%, SD 16.4%) than its specificity (mean 89.6%, SD 8.6%) whereas sensitivity for decision 2 was higher (mean 90.5%, SD 8.3%) than its specificity (mean 46.7%, SD 15.95%). Female participants were more risk averse and overtriaged more often than male participants, but age and level of education showed no association with participants’ risk averseness. Participants’ triage accuracy was higher when they were certain about their appraisal (2114/3381, 62.5%) than when being uncertain (378/714, 52.9%). However, most errors occurred when participants were certain of their decision (1267/1603, 79%). Participants were more commonly certain of their overtriage errors (mean 80.9%, SD 23.8%) than their undertriage errors (mean 72.5%, SD 30.9%; t>89=3.7; P<.001; d=0.39). ConclusionsOur study suggests that laypersons are overcautious in deciding whether they require medical care at all, but they miss identifying a considerable portion of emergencies. Our results further indicate that women are more risk averse than men in both types of decisions. Layperson participants made most triage errors when they were certain of their own appraisal. Thus, they might not follow or even seek advice (eg, from symptom checkers) in most instances where advice would be useful.https://formative.jmir.org/2022/10/e38977
spellingShingle Marvin Kopka
Markus A Feufel
Felix Balzer
Malte L Schmieding
The Triage Capability of Laypersons: Retrospective Exploratory Analysis
JMIR Formative Research
title The Triage Capability of Laypersons: Retrospective Exploratory Analysis
title_full The Triage Capability of Laypersons: Retrospective Exploratory Analysis
title_fullStr The Triage Capability of Laypersons: Retrospective Exploratory Analysis
title_full_unstemmed The Triage Capability of Laypersons: Retrospective Exploratory Analysis
title_short The Triage Capability of Laypersons: Retrospective Exploratory Analysis
title_sort triage capability of laypersons retrospective exploratory analysis
url https://formative.jmir.org/2022/10/e38977
work_keys_str_mv AT marvinkopka thetriagecapabilityoflaypersonsretrospectiveexploratoryanalysis
AT markusafeufel thetriagecapabilityoflaypersonsretrospectiveexploratoryanalysis
AT felixbalzer thetriagecapabilityoflaypersonsretrospectiveexploratoryanalysis
AT maltelschmieding thetriagecapabilityoflaypersonsretrospectiveexploratoryanalysis
AT marvinkopka triagecapabilityoflaypersonsretrospectiveexploratoryanalysis
AT markusafeufel triagecapabilityoflaypersonsretrospectiveexploratoryanalysis
AT felixbalzer triagecapabilityoflaypersonsretrospectiveexploratoryanalysis
AT maltelschmieding triagecapabilityoflaypersonsretrospectiveexploratoryanalysis