Accuracy and efficiency of utilizing Microsoft Excel search functions and artificial intelligence for retrospective data analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20261160Keywords:
Artificial intelligence, Retrospective, Database reviewAbstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has become integrated into many aspects of modern medicine, including medical research. Manual retrospective chart review has been regarded as an effective yet time-consuming and taxing process.
Methods: To identify an accurate yet faster process, a retrospective electronic chart analysis was performed comparing three modalities: Microsoft Excel search function and Microsoft CoPilot were compared against manual review in identifying appendiceal neoplasms in patients undergoing laparoscopic or open appendectomy from an extracted database. The time taken to identify key words establishing neoplastic processes and the number of words found were recorded for manual search, Microsoft Excel search function, and Microsoft CoPilot.
Results: The Microsoft Excel search function identified more terms than Microsoft CoPilot; however, it did not find all the instances found in manual search. The Microsoft Excel search function process took the least amount of time (2 minutes), and manual search took the most (2 hours 22 minutes). Although Microsoft CoPilot was the most dynamic tool, it was not as fast as the Microsoft Excel search function, nor as accurate as the other two modalities.
Conclusions: Although the Microsoft Excel search function had the best speed, it was a static tool that did not find every key word and could not extrapolate data. Based on this paper and other literature, AI has the potential to assist in retrospective chart analysis. However, the search function remains faster and much more accurate than AI at this time.
References
Kaul V, Enslin S, Gross SA. History of artificial intelligence in medicine. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;92(4):807-12.
Bauzon J, Romero-Velez G, Sehnem L, Shin J, Siperstein A, Jin J. Comparative Analysis of the Accuracy of Microsoft Excel Macros in Retrospective Chart Review Studies. J Surg Res. 2025;311:92-7.
Gearing RE, Mian IA, Barber J, Ickowicz A. A methodology for conducting retrospective chart review research in child and adolescent psychiatry. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2006;15(3):126-34.
Friedman R, Lisk R, Cordero-Bermudez K, Singh S, Ghani S, Gillette BM, et al. Optimizing Chart Review Efficiency in Pressure Injury Evaluation Using ChatGPT. Ann Plast Surg. 2025;94(4S Suppl 2):S327-33.
MedCalc Software Ltd. Diagnostic Test Evaluation. Available at: https://www.medcalc.org/en/calc/ diagnosic_test.php. Accessed on 04 April 2026.
Social Science Statistics. Chi-Square Test Calculator. Available at: https://www.socscistatistics.com/tests/ chisquare/calculator/. Accessed on 04 April 2026.
Laursen MS, Pedersen JS, Hansen RS, Savarimuthu TR, Lynggaard RB, Vinholt PJ. Doctors Identify Hemorrhage Better during Chart Review when Assisted by Artificial Intelligence. Appl Clin Inform. 2023;14(4):743-51.
Bulten W, Pinckaers H, van Boven H, Vink R, de Bel T, van Ginneken B, et al. Automated deep-learning system for Gleason grading of prostate cancer using biopsies: a diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(2):233-41.
Bauzon J, Murphy C, Wahi-Gururaj S. Using macros in microsoft excel to facilitate cleaning of research data. J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect. 2021;11(5):653-7.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
