Impacts of Symptom Checkers for Laypersons’ Self-diagnosis on Physicians in Primary Care: Scoping Review (Preprint)
2022-05-03

<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Symptom checkers (SCs) for laypersons’ self-assessment and preliminary self-diagnosis are widely used by the public. Little is known about the impact of these tools on health care professionals (HCPs) in primary care and their work. This is relevant to understanding how technological changes might affect the working world and how this is linked to work-related psychosocial demands and resources for HCPs. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> This scoping review aimed to systematically explore the existing publications on the impacts of SCs on HCPs in primary care and to identify knowledge gaps. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> We used the Arksey and O’Malley framework. We based our search string on the participant, concept, and context scheme and searched PubMed (MEDLINE) and CINAHL in January and June 2021. We performed a reference search in August 2021 and a manual search in November 2021. We included publications of peer-reviewed journals that focused on artificial intelligence- or algorithm-based self-diagnosing apps and tools for laypersons and had primary care or nonclinical settings as a relevant context. The characteristics of these studies were described numerically. We used thematic analysis to identify core themes. We followed the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist to report the study. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> Of the 2729 publications identified through initial and follow-up database searches, 43 full texts were screened for eligibility, of which 9 were included. Further 8 publications were included through manual search. Two publications were excluded after receiving feedback in the peer-review process. Fifteen publications were included in the final sample, which comprised 5 (33%) commentaries or nonresearch publications, 3 (20%) literature reviews, and 7 (47%) research publications. The earliest publications stemmed from 2015. We identified 5 themes. The theme &lt;i&gt;finding prediagnosis&lt;/i&gt; comprised the comparison between SCs and physicians. We identified the performance of the diagnosis and the relevance of human factors as topics. In the theme &lt;i&gt;layperson-technology relationship,&lt;/i&gt; we identified potentials for laypersons’ empowerment and harm through SCs. Our analysis showed potential disruptions of the physician-patient relationship and uncontested roles of HCPs in the theme &lt;i&gt;(impacts on) physician-patient relationship.&lt;/i&gt; In the theme &lt;i&gt;impacts on HCPs’ tasks,&lt;/i&gt; we described the reduction or increase in HCPs’ workload. We identified potential transformations of HCPs’ work and impacts on the health care system in the theme &lt;i&gt;future role of SCs in health care.&lt;/i&gt; </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> The scoping review approach was suitable for this new field of research. The heterogeneity of technologies and wordings was challenging. We identified research gaps in the literature regarding the impact of artificial intelligence– or algorithm-based self-diagnosing apps or tools on the work of HCPs in primary care. Further empirical studies on HCPs’ lived experiences are needed, as the current literature depicts expectations rather than empirical findings. </sec>