Dear Editor, The fundamentals of the neurological examination are essential to any neuroscientist.1 The neurological examination, combined with obtaining a thorough medical history, allows the examiner to define and localize any neurological disorder.1 The neurologic examination needs face-to-face interaction, meticulous history taking, careful evaluation of physical signs, and intelligent processing of the collected information as per individual needs that cannot currently be easily replaced by technology or sophisticated instruments alone.1,2 The advent of newer methods and techniques is redefining the art of neurological examination from traditional methods to technology-based digital neurologic algorithms with automated decision prompting protocols.1,3 There is a continuously increasing need for experts to evaluate the growing number of neurological disorders, which is further compounded by a shortage of experts, particularly in remote areas and in regions with limited resources.4 This shortage of human resources can partly be addressed with the development of digital devices that can provide accurate and quality information to make clinical decisions.5 Simultaneously, it must be emphasized that technology supplementation can enhance frequent data collection, and continuous measurements of data and processing can make decision-making easy and fast.3 It is also true that digital tools, when compared to traditional methods, have the potential to provide quantitative, consistent, reliable, and reproducible data3 and can potentially reduce interobserver or measurement variations. The newer methods include digital devices to measure vital parameters (to calculate clinical scores), movements (both normal and abnormal), eye-tracking glasses or headsets, and pupillometers. With the help of natural language processing and machine learning algorithms, the data can be processed to make a diagnosis or to define personalized treatment protocols.3,5,6 The current challenges suggest that clinical artificial intelligence systems should be designed as “assistive” and not “autonomous” methods to ensure the safety of the patients.7 There is also a need to ensure that over a period of time we should be able to shortlist the essential parameters which are necessary to make safe and comprehensive decisions without increasing the burden or data overload on the healthcare provider in the field. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.
Agrawal et al. (Wed,) studied this question.