Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Diagnostic accuracy of otitis media with and without a fictitious AI support among physicians in primary care and medical students
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine.
General Practice/Family Medicine, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; Research, Education, Development & Innovation, Primary Health Care, Region Västra Götaland, Sweden.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostics and Intervention.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9425-8632
Show others and affiliations
2026 (English)In: Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care, ISSN 0281-3432, E-ISSN 1502-7724, Vol. 44, no 1, p. 1-13Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Otitis media (OM) in children is a common infection in primary care, contributing to a significant global health and economic burden. In high-income countries, diagnostic inaccuracy leads to over-diagnosis of acute OM (AOM) and over-prescribing of antibiotics, which may contribute to antibiotic resistance.

Aim: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy and the influence of artificial intelligence (AI) in diagnosing OM among primary care physicians and medical students.

Method: A diagnostic accuracy study in which primary care physicians and medical students diagnosed AOM, OM with effusion (OME), and normal eardrums using 21 high-quality digital images, both without and with a fictitious AI support. We estimated the technological impact of the fictitious AI support.

Results: Overall diagnostic accuracy was 64% without, and 75% with AI support. The most experienced physicians reached 69% without, and 80% with AI; the least experienced 61% without, and 73% with AI; medical students reached 64% without, and 74% with AI. Accuracy for AOM was 77% without and 86% with AI, and for OME 46% without and 66% with AI. Mean diagnostic confidence increased significantly with AI support. The technological impact was 1.4. Automation bias was 1.2 overall, 0.9 for the most experienced and 1.2 for the least experienced physicians.

Conclusion: We report modest diagnostic accuracy for OM among primary care physicians and medical students. The fictitious AI support system improved both accuracy and diagnostic confidence and reduced over-diagnosis. The most experienced physicians achieved the highest accuracy, the less experienced were more often misled by the fictitious AI.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2026. Vol. 44, no 1, p. 1-13
Keywords [en]
diagnostic accuracy, Primary Health Care, Artificial intelligence, Clinical Medicine, diagnostic confidence, General & Internal Medicine, Health Care Sciences & Services, Klinisk medicin, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, Medicine, General & Internal, otitis media, Science & Technology, technological impact
National Category
General Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-246944DOI: 10.1080/02813432.2025.2571936ISI: 001594499800001PubMedID: 41090395Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-105019227056OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-246944DiVA, id: diva2:2017684
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2021–0643Available from: 2025-12-01 Created: 2025-12-01 Last updated: 2026-03-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1790 kB)52 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT02.pdfFile size 1790 kBChecksum SHA-512
4b7ac17cba0daae75921d5132929be2d46a2df4d05619fc2499222bab1155a5af5c7349673a0a608d0de1e6a5bdae4e662fcdb3f72a8e2b84de8524a6ddb762b
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Hedman, MalinLindmark, ManfredSandström, JosefinWerner, MimmiÖhberg, FredrikLundberg, Thorbjörn

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hedman, MalinLindmark, ManfredSandström, JosefinWerner, MimmiÖhberg, FredrikLundberg, Thorbjörn
By organisation
Department of Public Health and Clinical MedicineDepartment of Diagnostics and InterventionOtorhinolaryngology
In the same journal
Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care
General Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 83 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 621 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf