Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 May 28:13:1747-1753.
doi: 10.2147/COPD.S165533. eCollection 2018.

Chronic obstructive lung disease "expert system": validation of a predictive tool for assisting diagnosis

Affiliations

Chronic obstructive lung disease "expert system": validation of a predictive tool for assisting diagnosis

Fulvio Braido et al. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. .

Abstract

Purpose: The purposes of this study were development and validation of an expert system (ES) aimed at supporting the diagnosis of chronic obstructive lung disease (COLD).

Methods: A questionnaire and a WebFlex code were developed and validated in silico. An expert panel pilot validation on 60 cases and a clinical validation on 241 cases were performed.

Results: The developed questionnaire and code validated in silico resulted in a suitable tool to support the medical diagnosis. The clinical validation of the ES was performed in an academic setting that included six different reference centers for respiratory diseases. The results of the ES expressed as a score associated with the risk of suffering from COLD were matched and compared with the final clinical diagnoses. A set of 60 patients were evaluated by a pilot expert panel validation with the aim of calculating the sample size for the clinical validation study. The concordance analysis between these preliminary ES scores and diagnoses performed by the experts indicated that the accuracy was 94.7% when both experts and the system confirmed the COLD diagnosis and 86.3% when COLD was excluded. Based on these results, the sample size of the validation set was established in 240 patients. The clinical validation, performed on 241 patients, resulted in ES accuracy of 97.5%, with confirmed COLD diagnosis in 53.6% of the cases and excluded COLD diagnosis in 32% of the cases. In 11.2% of cases, a diagnosis of COLD was made by the experts, although the imaging results showed a potential concomitant disorder.

Conclusion: The ES presented here (COLDES) is a safe and robust supporting tool for COLD diagnosis in primary care settings.

Keywords: chronic obstructive lung diseases; diagnosis; expert systems.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Website design of the COLDES, an obstructive lung disease diagnosis-supporting tool. Notes: Two pages of the questionnaire are shown. The second page of the questionnaire (right) includes possible further questions that are determined by the answers given on the first page of the questionnaire (left). Abbreviations: COLD, chronic obstructive lung disease; ES, expert system.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Algorithm describing the different steps in the process of validation of the tool. Abbreviations: COLD, chronic obstructive lung disease; ES, expert system.

References

    1. Fishman AP. Chronic obstructive lung disease. Prev Med. 1973;2:10–13. - PubMed
    1. Agusti A, Bel E, Thomas M, et al. Treatable traits: toward precision medicine of chronic airway diseases. Eur Respir J. 2016;47(2):410–419. - PubMed
    1. Bednarek M, Maciejewski J, Wozniak M, Kuca P, Zielinski J. Prevalence, severity and underdiagnosis of COPD in the primary care setting. Thorax. 2008;63(5):402–407. - PubMed
    1. Lenaeus MJ, Hirschmann J. Primary care of the patient with asthma. Med Clin North Am. 2015;99(5):953–967. - PubMed
    1. Van Schayck CP, Loozen JM, Wagena E, Akkermans RP, Wesseling GJ. Detecting patients at a high risk of developing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in general practice: cross sectional case finding study. BMJ. 2002;324:1370. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types