The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Medical Diagnostic Decision Support Systems--Past, Present, And Future: A Threaded Bibliography and Brief Commentary
Open accessAbstract
Articles about medical diagnostic decision support (MDDS) systems often begin with a disclaimer such as, "despite many years of research and millions of dollars of expenditures on medical diagnostic systems, none is in widespread use at the present time." While this statement remains true in the sense that no single diagnostic system is in widespread use, it is misleading with regard to the state of the art of these systems. Diagnostic systems, many simple and some complex, are now ubiquitous, and research on MDDS systems is growing. The nature of MDDS systems has diversified over time. The prospects for adoption of large-scale diagnostic systems are better now than ever before, due to enthusiasm for implementation of the electronic medical record in academic, commercial, and primary care settings. Diagnostic decision support systems have become an established component of medical technology. This paper provides a review and a threaded bibliography for some of the important work on MDDS systems over the years from 1954 to 1993.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
“Clinical versus Actuarial Judgment.”
Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1989) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.2648573 · Cited by 2,298
Cognitive Science in Medicine: Biomedical Modeling
(1989) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1878.001.0001 · Cited by 77
Cited by
Artificial intelligence in healthcare
Yu, K.-H., Beam, A. L., & Kohane, I. S. (2018) · Nature Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1038/s41551-018-0305-z · Cited by 2,817
Kawamoto, K., Houlihan, C. A., Balas, E. A., & Lobach, D. F. (2005) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.38398.500764.8f · Cited by 2,703
Overconfidence as a Cause of Diagnostic Error in Medicine
Berner, E. S., & Graber, M. L. (2008) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2008.01.001 · Cited by 1,034
Artificial intelligence, bias and clinical safety
Challen, R., Denny, J., Pitt, M., Gompels, L., Edwards, T., & Tsaneva-Atanasova, K. (2019) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008370 · Cited by 956
Loh, H. W., Ooi, C. P., Seoni, S., Barua, P. D., Molinari, F., & Acharya, U. R. (2022) · Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine · doi:10.1016/j.cmpb.2022.107161 · Cited by 734
Metadata
- Authors
- Miller, R. A.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1994-01-01
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 8-27
- ISSN
- 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-974X
- OpenAlex
- W2180456856
- Cited by
- 458
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 37.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Medical Diagnostic Decision Support Systems--Past, Present, And Future: A Threaded Bibliography and Brief Commentary. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jamia.1994.95236141
- The paper
- Miller, R. A. (1994). Medical Diagnostic Decision Support Systems--Past, Present, And Future: A Threaded Bibliography and Brief Commentary. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.1994.95236141
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
