Comments on: Researchers say AI prescribes better treatment than doctors

By: deb

deb — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:27:10 +0000

Maybe the computer does such a good job because it actually has to listen to more than the first fifteen seconds’ worth of symptoms the patient blurts out as fast as possible before the computer scurries off to the next patient.

By: Michael Roth

Michael Roth — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:10:12 +0000

My blog (above) offers my 2 cents – along with some docs that I interviewed. Loved this study/article and all the comments. Absolutely fascinating.

By: Michael Roth

Michael Roth — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:07:08 +0000

Will Artificial Intelligence (AI) lead Docs to rely too heavily on data vs. judgment, experience & intuition? http://bit.ly/134GxkK

By: Tom Lawford MD

Tom Lawford MD — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 17:12:13 +0000

For todays new problem physician visit, there are two intertwined data inputs at work. The physician opens with “so whats the problem that brought you here today” and then expands on what he/she has been offered with clarifying questions. Based on what the physical shows and the verbal data the physician gathers, heshe forms a differential diagnosis in mind and orders lab/scans on all the items in the DfDx. This works well enough if the patient is one of the 90% that have “one of the top ten” dignoses. But the next 4% of patients are in “one of the top 100 diagnoses” and this begins to require many more questions and even some intuition to add extras to the lab/scans being ordered. The next 4% of patients are more exotic, and in one of “the top 500″ diagnoses, gets harder. The last 2% of patients are in one of the “Top 1000 diagnoses” – very hard. I have confidence in the computer doing a great job on the “top 10 of DX”. But for the most difficult 2% of patients, I am dubious that the computer will notice tiny items such as “the sclera of the eyes has a barely noticeable slight blue blendedin with itsusual white (DX=PXE)”, or that the patient has a face that”somehow has the slight hint of a lions face”, or that the “lower ear lobe comes straight down into the skin and doesnt go up a bit (cardiac problem)” Here I think that the computer would blow it just like that last three specialists blew it.

By: vish

vish — Sat, 16 Feb 2013 20:04:49 +0000

so how did you end up finding out about the stricture/crohns?

By: Galactus

Galactus — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 20:21:37 +0000

incompetence will be on the rise. Doctors will be spineless morons without he ability to make a decision without looking at the computer for reassurance and the right way. I’ve seen the lack of confidence caused by having the ultimate machine right next to you. You second guess everything you do, because you know it can do it better than you.

By: Dănuț Haiduc

Dănuț Haiduc — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 17:42:12 +0000

The R programming language. It’s popular among data scientists.

By: Dave Mittman

Dave Mittman — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 17:37:20 +0000

I find this so interesting.
As a clinician the vast majority of people who come in have straightforward problems. Most do not require Sherlock Holmes or the Mayo Brothers to diagnose and treat them. Medicine is usually straightforward as is treatment and when its not, you go to others you trust which could include computers. What counts so much more is time spent gathering that information. Is the patient telling you the truth? Did you do a full exam and take the TIME to REALLY listen. If you did, you will have a happy patient who knows you care about them. A computer can’t see tell tale bruises and bring up spouse abuse, nor can it say, “How long have you had that lesion on your forehead?” It can’t hug you or figure out that you are not taking your medications because you can’t afford them because you got laid off three months ago. Or say, your Dad always worried too much-how ids your anxiety lately?
I take my medical care from humans, aided by all means to make us better. Give me someone who has time to see me when I need them, is well trained (PAs and NPs included) and takes time to care.
Dave Mittman, PA, DFAAPA
Physician Assistant/Associate
That’s why a good clinician will always be needed.

By: Derrick Harris

Derrick Harris — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 05:07:43 +0000

Thanks for the comment. At the risk of getting into an argument over semantics, I’d say “can” is accurate. At least in their study — which, yes, is just a study — the model *did* perform better on average than doctors.

By: owenl1998

owenl1998 — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 01:00:44 +0000

Hugely significant difference in wording from original to this article – changed ‘could’ to ‘can’ which is the same as saying ‘might’ versus ‘will’. Basically the researchers modeled some stuff out against a database and believe that their technique could have the outcomes listed. But they don’t know that yet